Customer Reviews

Canon PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II Inkjet Photo Printer (3295B002)

5 star:		(97)
4 star:		(27)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

I Just got this printer from Adorama today (via UPS) and this thing is incredible. Im a professional photographer and this printer prints lab qaulity prints super fast. I made sure I used Photoshop to print some test pictures )4x6 on Canon Photo Plus Semi Gloss and it matched exactly what was on my screen. As a matter of fact the prints look better than whats on my screen...I had to do a double take. I no longer will be using the lab to order prints for my clients (only wedding books), Im printing them all myself. The speed is also amazing. The only thing I dont like thus far is the noise of the print head when the printer starts up and before prints start printing. When the picture prints its pretty quiet though. I will update my review after about a week after i dump a few hundred more prints for my clients.

***** Update #1 ***** : Ok Now I've had this printer a few weeks and I've printed a few hundred pictures in a variety of sizes (4x6, 5x7 , 8.5x11 and 13x19) and this is a must have printer for those wanting to print their own professional lab (and better than lab quality) photos. This bad boy is very fast and the print quality is just absolutely superb (I use Canon Photo Paper Plus Glossy , Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl, Ilford Galerie Smooth Gloss Paper and Ilfor Printasia 13x19 paper and Canon Photo Paper Plus Glossy II 13x19). I've shown my photographs to a variety of clients, potential clients, freinds and family and they are blown away by the quality of the prints. When I tell them I printed them myself they are like "What?, No way" and then they asume I must have spent a whole lot of money on the printer...which is wrong ([...] after rebate from amazon/adorama).

Pros :

Fast - This printer spits out a vibrant and full of color 13x19 glossy print in under 3 minutes 30 seconds.

[...]

Quiet - I can print at all hours of the night and not worry about waking anyone up. When Im in the next room with the door open the printer prints so quiet I cant even hear it and have to come check on the print job to make sure it didnt crash since I cant hear any noise in the next room..lol

Quality - Prints professional quality prints on a variety of papers in many different sizes.

Paper - You ARE NOT limited to Canon papers as you can use a bunch of other manufacturers papers. My Favorite thus far is Ilford (cheap from amazon and is basically identical to expensive Canon paper).

Ink Usuage - Good on ink, Not really an ink guzzler. I printed dozens and dozens of 4x6's and even a bunch of 8x11's and 13x19s and the ink kept going and going, until I finaly started running low (after many prints had been printed). Also I now use The Continuous Ink System , so ink is now dirt cheap. Costs something link [...] per cartridge (estimated - all I know is I pay [...] for and 8 pack of about 880 ml's of ink which is over 80 cartridges (no joke, visit fleabay and youll see tons of them)...Save money and Dont buy Canon Ink Carts and you will save at least 50% right off the bat).

Cons :

B&W printing - Prints mediocre black and white prints. This is no secret and I knew this before I bought it. I dont care about black and white prints just color so its all good for me.

Size - This is a big mamma-jamma. You will have to dedicate a space to this thing because of its width.

CD Printing - The US version of this printer does not print to CD's at all and there are no hacks that enable the CD printing feature (Like with the Pixma Pro 9000). If you need CD printing, just print to photo quality CD labels.

Overal: This is a fantastic buy. If you need professional quality color prints done in house you will surely love this printer. Canon outdid itself with this model... The price is steadily falling too. Especially after the [...] rebate.

***** Update #2 ******

DO NOT USE OR BUY THE CONTINUOUS INK SYSTEM FROM SUPERjetUSA With THIS PRINTER:

I bought the continuous ink system from superjetUSA off ebay and it worked fine for a short while and then it leaked ink all inside my printer. All 800+ml's. It was a huge mess and it caused me to use many hours of my valuable time and waste dozens and dozens and dozens of pieces of plain paper/photo paper to clean out the leaking mess. Then SuperjetUSA refused to give me my money back and kept telling me to do this and that and email them pictures of the mess. It took me weeks to clean it up and there is a still an ink mess in my printer. ONLY USE INK CARTRIDGES (stay away from the Continuous ink system) FROM A GOOD SOURCE. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

I've had this printer for months and it continues to be an awesome printer. No complaints. I made almost the entire printer purchase price of the printer back within only a few weeks of having the printer..thats how good the prints are.. THE CANON PIXMA 9000 MKII is an awesome investment.

Have had this printer for about a week now. Upgraded from a Epson R2400. Reason for upgrading, couldn't keep the epson's printhead from clogging. Wasted more ink trying to keep the printheads clean then I actually used printing pictures. As far as print quality goes between the two is basically a toss up. Prints from the canon are more glossy then the epson probably due to the fact the canon uses dye inks while the epson uses pigment. The only thing I don't like about the canon is right out of the box the prints seem to have to much red in them. Playing around in Adobe CS4 I was able to get the prints to my liking. With the easyprint software included with the printer, no matter what setting it seemed all the pictures have a red tint to them. This is one area the epson had an advantage, the easyprint software that came with the epson produced prints spot on. This is the reason I gave the printer a four star instead of five. The people that use adobe photoshop to print all their pictures won't have a problem, but people like me that like using the easyphoto program to print out a bunch of picutres might be somewhat disappointed. A couple of more pluses of the printer are: Turns out prints faster then the epson R2400. Prints look sharp on a wide variety of paper, not just the canon paper. This was one drawback of the epson R2400, seemed only to print good on epson paper. Not the case with the canon. Also, seems better on ink compared to the epson so far. I have printed a lot of photos of all sizes and all the ink levels are still pretty close to full. Overall I would definetly recommend this printer.

This is a truly wonderful printer. The prints are amazingly crisp and accurate and vibrant. If you can imagine it, capture it, see it: This printer will print it for you. What I see on my LCD computer screen is what I get on the print. Extremely easy to install and use. If you just want to crank out a bunch of 4X6s for your family or print large art prints, this printer does it with ease: The "make prints of photos" software function makes this a breeze. It leads you through easy steps to making your prints and shows you images all along of what you are planning to print (instant previews all the way through) until you finally commit the "print" button. I love this SW. It's quiet. It can take a large stack of photo paper so you can select what you want to print and walk away.

The print quality is astonishing. It's just as good as anything you'll get from a photo lab. And at the price of this printer?! Amazing. I haven't made 13X19s yet (that paper is on the way) but everything I've printed has knocked my socks off. This printer opens up whole new avenues for my photography. I alsways looked forward to someday having a color darkroom. Well, now I have it, without all the space used, the chemicals stinking and going bad in their bottles, and BETTER print no-fade life.

[Update 11-Aug-2009: I've made several 13X19 prints now and they are luscious. Just eye-popping. It makes you want to just print off all your favorite shots at 13X19 RIGHT NOW! But what would I do with them all ... Bottom line: Print quality knocks your socks off. Everyone to whom I've shown the 13X19s has been suitably impressed. They clearly show the limitations of the film/sensor and lenses, not the printer. Wow.]

The only negative on this printer would be size: It's big. But, I don't really see how they could have made it much smaller, since it accommodates 13X19 inch paper(! It has all sorts of clever panels that fold open when you need them to print larger papers, etc., and they fold away to keep the overall size smaller, unless you need them. For all the paper sizes I am using: 4X6, 5X7, 8.5X11, and 13X19, the paper hopper is the vertical one, which means the footprint required by the printer is much smaller than would be required by a horizontal paper feed. It's also much easier to access and load than horizontal feed would be. Nicely engineered and thought-out.

I have been mostly using the premium Canon glossy paper (well worth it) but also some Kodak glossy paper. All results are excellent. Here are the papers I've been mainly using:
Canon Glossy II 4 x 6 Inch Photo Paper Plus Glossy 400 Sheets (2311B031)
Canon Photo Paper Plus Glossy II 8.5in x 11in 20 Sheets (2311B001)
Canon Glossy II 13 x 19 Inch Photo Paper Plus Glossy 20 Sheets (2311B026)

I love this printer! Best thing I've bought for photography since my first digital SLR.

My computer: Dell Dimension 2400, 2GB RAM, Windows XP Professional
[Update 21-Oct-11: I am now using a Dell Studio X something or another, 12GB RAM, very large HD, etc. and Windows 7. The transition was seamless from XP and the old computer.]

[Update 11-Sep-09:] I wondered a little whether this printer would do as well with documents put together in MSWord, Publisher, etc. Good news: The results are just as good. Wonderful printer.

[Update 1-Oct-2010:] I have been using this printer for a long time now. I've gone through at least 2000 prints (no kidding) and I continue to love this printer. It is honestly amazing (much better than photo processes. One of the beauties of digital is that you only have ONE LENS to worry about. After capture, exactly what the CCD records can be displayed or printed.)

This update is to report my experience with some non-Canon materials in this printer. The Canon inks (and papers to a lesser degree) are expensive; and we all know this is how the OEMs actually make their money: By selling us supplies. Tempted by the prices, I've tried some other materials. I am now using nothing but Canon inks and paper.

I have used some of the after-market inks sold on Amazon. They worked OK; but the prints just didn't have the snap and zing I was used to. But the show-stopper was this: These after-market ink cartidges constantly (constantly!) clogged, or, if they didn't clog, they produced fine streaks in any areas of the photo with large, constant tone (sky, still water, bokeh areas). These were particularly obnoxious in bokeh areas and sky. I tried all the trouble-shooting and nothing worked consistently. I've (literally) thrown all these away and use nothing but Canon ink now -- with perfect and completely consistent results. I also used some Ilford paper that was OK; but the price difference just didn't justify going away from the Canon Glossy II papers (see links above).

My bottom line: Use nothing but the Canon inks (especially) and paper. They really are worth the money. I had to learn this the hard way.

[update on 4-Apr-2011:] I have now used the profiles on the Red River paper site and, along with some adjustment in Lightroom and help from Scott Kelby's books, I have gotten very nice results with the Red River papers. Well worth a try! Sitck with the Canon inks though.

I'm using the brother HL-2170W wireless laser printer for most print jobs and the Canon PIXMA for photos only. A great combination of printers.

Brother HL-2170W 23ppm Laser Printer with Wireless and Wired Network Interfaces

I bought this to replace a Canon i9900, which I believe is just about identical except for ink cartridges. The i9900 lasted me just over 4 years, being used nearly every day, with a lot of 13"X19" photos and graphics being printed. It finally succumbed to a clogged printhead or damaged ribbon cable to the printhead, I'm not sure which. I might still try to fix it, I just didn't have time on a deadline, as I have a ton of ink for it. If this newer model lasts as well as the previous one I will be very happy, and I don't see why it wouldn't.

It was amazingly easy to set up, I didn't even open the manual, I just started tearing orange pieces of tape off, plugged it in, and started printing.

One problem is that the driver for OSX does not allow for shutting off color management. So, if you build or use a custom profile, you're pretty much screwed if you try to print with a program that tries to manage colors. As of the writing of this review, there is no 64-bit version of the driver available, and my experience with Canon is they don't put a lot of effort into creating or updating their software.

This printer uses Chromalife 100 ink, which is supposed to be fade resistant. I suspect that the biggest difference here is that the cartridges are now 'chipped' to deter refilling. I figure I saved over $5,000 in 4 years by refilling cartridges. Yes, I may have clogged a printhead, the second time I've done that as a matter of fact, but it is well worth it. I'm not printing that much these days, so I just bought 2 of the Canon sets of ink, its not too horribly priced. Maybe though, I'll find a way to refill these. The printer seems to be pretty good on ink. I've printed about 30 pages (8.5X11) of photos with about 75% coverage, and only 3 of the tanks are showing down about one third.

As far as longevity, I never really worried about it. I can always print another copy years down the road if need be. To sell something or to print something I really like, I use a printing service (Adorama) that uses real photographic paper. If you need to do it at home, the next higher model (Pro 9500 MarkII) uses pigmented ink, but the printer and the ink are much more expensive. I also thought about Epson as an alternative, but the last one I owned used a goofy vacuum system with a bunch of tubing to deliver the ink. One leak, lose vacuum, need repair. From what I read, most Epson printers require daily usage or the print heads clog up, and they eat ink like crazy trying to clear them.

This thing does make an awful racket when feeding paper. My old one was bad, but this is a terrible plastic crashing sound.

The pictures that come out of this thing are stellar. They are bright and crisp on both Glossy and Semi-gloss paper. There are no visible ink dots, and no banding. Even though Photoshop showed blacks as out of gamut, the prints exhibit a rich deep black. The speed seems a little slow, but not real bothersome if you're not in a big rush.

Even with some shortcomings, the picture quality more than makes up for them. At this price for a large format printer I would buy another one in a minute if I needed a new printer, or if I was just getting started printing my own large format photos.

I agonized over what pro photo printer I wanted to buy for my young, budding photography business. Epson, HP, and Canon are the only real competitors, so I looked over their offerings. HP has all the bells and whistles, but they just lag behind the competition on many fronts.

My short list comprised of:
Epson R2880
Epson R1900
Epson Photo 1400
Canon Pixma Pro9000
Canon Pixma Pro9500

After reading over many, many reviews, I settled on the Canon Pixma Pro9000 and am very satisfied with my purchase. There are pros and cons to the Canon that I will outline below:

Cons:
Display life for the ChromaLife 100 dye-based ink is 30yrs behind regular glass (you can expect 40-50yrs behind UV glass, probably).
Noisy in standard mode! If you aren't in quiet mode, this thing will make you jump when printing.
Lack of included accessories! This didn't even come with a USB cable to plug into your computer. Don't forget to pick one up!
Lack of native CD printing (you can "hack" the printer to be a European version which allows for native CD printing....sadly Epson and Panasonic have the patents on it and Canon refuses to pay for something it developed simultaneously in Japan).
Lack of roll printing. This printer is limited to 13x26.61" prints which means you can't print very long panoramas.
Matte Printing - With only one black ink, matte B&W prints are not the best, although they do look quite nice.

Pros:
Archival Ink - Yes, they won't last quite as long as a pigment based ink, but if properly mounted, you can get 40-50yrs out of them, and in an archival album, expect 300+ years according to research.
FAST - This thing will print a full 13x19" print in under 2 minutes....hell, most printers can't even do an 8x10 in that time.
Ink Usage - This printer sips ink. Having used an Epson R2880 in college, this printer is a dream. It's much better for a young photographer's budget.
Picture Quality - The inks might not last as long, but they do sure as hell POP! They are better than any pigment based ink I've used.
Price - This is much cheaper than any other quality printer, and the costs to run it are much cheaper with the Canon ChromaLife Inks.

Notes:
Make sure your print heads are clean if you're going to use standard mode or you'll definitely get banding. I typically do 2 proofs of all photos on a 3x3 grid of photos, first using standard and applying some tweaks, then using High Quality to ensure that no further tweaks are necessary. That has given the printer time to clean the heads and I'm ready for my final prints.

I may update this review as I continue to tweak my process.

This printer blew me away! Wow, I've had it for a few weeks now, and I can't find anything to complain about, except the software it comes with: on some prints which had areas of solid color, that color DID NOT come out the same on different prints, even though the color was absolutely identical (same rgb values in Photoshop for instance). However, printing those same tiff images from photoshop produced identical solid color on different prints. So, the problem is their software. However this is not a deal braker for me in any way as I don't even like the way their software works. Not to mention that photoshop interface for this printer is actually better then canon standalone software: it has more options and everything is intuitive and simple.

From the first moment, the easy of use, setup, and above all - quality of print results have been nothing short of extraordinary. I was very close to buying a three times more expensive Epson printer, as I do a lot of photography and am glad I don't have to spend my days and nights going blind in a darkroom. This is the first time that I can say with confidence that color photography, as a wet process, is dead. I will do some comparisons to some cibas I have from years ago and if this thing manages to pull at least similar quality, I will be in heaven, as great cibachromes not only cost an arm and a leg, but there are very few (im)mortals on this planet who know how to do them well...

All in all, if you are considering this printer, think no more, but take advantage of the great deal they are having right now. I got mine for $350 after rebate which is an incredible deal.

BTW, so far I printed about 25 8x10 color photographs, mostly for fun, and they came out absolutely stunning. With some older bubble jets, this would be the end of my color cartridge, but when I check the ink level, it shows that nothing was used up! I am almost inclined to believe that something's wrong with the software and that there is much less ink left than what it's telling me. So I will see how many prints I do before I have to buy more print cartridges and will add that info here at a later date. I will be doing a lot of printing in the next few weeks so new inks will be in order soon I imagine.

However, if inks are really still almost full as it's telling me, then that would be nothing short of a miracle.

ADDITIONAL INFO, after another month of use:

By now I have printed almost 100 8.5 x 11 in prints, full color all of them. They all had to have borders in specific colors, which means that actual image size in full color was slightly less then 8x10, perhaps 7x9 or so. But around the edges was a half an inch solid color which most often was light purple. This meant heavy use of p-magenta and p-cyan inks. By now, those two are reportedly very low, almost empty, however, the printer still prints, so I am not replacing them just yet. I will when they are completely empty.
I bought those two inks separately in a local photo store for about $14.00. However, all the other ink are almost completely full!

I also did a quick comparison test with my old ciba prints. I compared prints made from a 4x5 in Velvia slide, and printed as a ciba, as a RA4 color print from an internegative, and then I did a test print with this printer, on a pearl paper (ciba was done on super glossy paper). The results from Canon Pro9000 MkII are way better then color photograph produced from an internegative. Compared to CIBA print, the yellows, blues and greens from the CANON Pro9000 MkII are pretty much as saturated and detailed as the CIBA. The only difference I found was in reds, however, the comparison is not fair as I have not tried to compensate for that, nor have I gone through a serious calibration process yet. I will try to color correct for those lacking reds, and will post more comments later. All in all, compared to Ciba prints, this printer ilooks very promising. I would not be surprised if I achieve pretty much the same quality after more testing and adjusting. After all, even good ciba prints are possible only after major voodoo work, they don't come out spectacular "out of the box".

A few other prints, at full 8.5 x 11 in, just as a quick comparison to the same image produced from color negative as a wet process, showed Canon prints superior in every respect: sharpness, color, saturation, everything was much better, which makes me very happy. And best of all - there is not a hint of prints being produced on a bubble jet printer at all! I can spot a bubble jet print, even those which come from expensive, pro printers, but this one, perhaps because it's dye inks sink into the paper, are indistinguishable from regular color photographs, even under a magnifying glass.

One note on paper: it seems that different papers absorb these inks differently. Those that absorb them better will leave colors less saturated and lighter, while those which do not absorb as much will leave those inks more on the top of the paper, making for more saturated and darker colors. The difference is significant even between similar papers. E.g. ILFORD "premium photo pearl paper" which I ordered through Amazon, (it's the one that has a beach and sunset scene on the cover, with silver borders) absorbs inks much better, and as a result produces prints which are instantly dry and whose surface appears more photo-like as shininess does not depend on the ink color of a given area. However, in rush I needed more paper, and bought ILFORD "Galerie Classic Pearl paper", and that one absorbs less ink, produces darker and more saturated colors, and prints come out wet as a result (which means they can easily smudge for a long while after printing); it is also easier to notice with Ilfored Gallerie Classic Pearl that it is a print produced in printer as from some angles one can see difference in colors reflectin light differently. This may not be a big deal to some, but it is to me. I prefer more saturated colors, but I don't want anyone to be able to tell how the prints were produced. In that respect I prefer Ilford Premium Photo Pearl, and would just adjust the colors to increase saturation if needed.

As for reliability and performance, the printer has been printing steadily without as much as a hick-up. My only complaint, if I may call it that, is that it is not compatible with windows XP 64 bit, which was never promised anyway.

UPDATE: MAY, 1, 2011

It has been a year since I bought this printer. The printer is working as well as the first day I bought it. It is that reliability which I love about it. Sometimes I don't use it for weeks, yet I turn it on and it goes like nothing happened. No clogged jets, no wasted inks, no problems. If I ever had a problem (such as prints being off to the side, or getting only half of the image on a paper with the rest of it blank), the cause was actually photoshop; restarting the computer solved those problems. Since I bought the printer, about a hundred 8.5 x 11in photos were printed on it. Most of those prints had only about 50% coverage. I changed photo-magenta twice, photo-cyan once, and bought one pack of CYMK here at amazon which all had to be changed around the same time. I also printed a few large prints which came out great (13 x 19in).
I still did not get a chance to do proper callibration of it yet which speaks volumes about the quality out of the box: if you are not into meddling with color profiles, callibration and such, then don't be afraid to just use the printer as is, and choose the proper paper setting in printer options (sometimes you set them and they get changed. It is best to always check before hitting the "print" button. On some prints of photos taken with a cheap point-and-shoot digital camera (which only has a jpg format), dark areas looked a bit too red. Prints from pro digital cameras looked stunning.

Having purchased the Pro9000 Mark II after a few years of owning the previous version, I can say with some assurance that this one is improved. Its print speed is slightly faster, and they've added some new cleaning features that I now don't know how I did without. That being said, it's basically the same printer (it even uses the same print head as the earlier model), and some of my main complaints about it were not addressed with the update.

The Pros: This is truly a professional grade printer which I have used heavily for several months. I produce prints of my artwork sometimes at the rate of three or four hundred 8x10's a week, and at other times it sits idle for a week or two at a time. The color quality with genuine canon inks is incredible - in my experience requiring little to no calibration with a properly set up, quality monitor. While printing, it's quick and quiet, even without its special Quiet Mode enabled, and I have actually turned down its printing speed at times, to allow for more drying time between prints. If you need to print very high quality, medium-large format pictures (whether photos or art) at reasonably high volume, this printer is definitely a good choice.

The Cons: This may not be a good printer for someone who intends to use it only a few times a year, as it does use large amounts of ink in its cleaning cycles, and if you leave it sitting too long it will require several. What seems to be lacking more than the printer itself is the software it comes with - most irritating is its lack of support for 11x14" paper, a standard print and photo size readily available on one of my previous printers, an Epson Stylus Photo 1280. Its batch printing program, Easy-PhotoPrint, also limits paper type selection based on paper size - perhaps useful if printing only with Canon's paper, but in my experience it handles other brands just as well. Points that others have brought up about its size are more or less accurate - it is a behemoth. Instead of sitting next to my computer, it has the top of a shelving unit all to itself, and will overwhelm most desktop space. It also requires space behind and in front for those big 13x19" prints you'll be producing.

All in all, the good points of this printer far outweigh the bad, but for a very select number of people. If you're printing only letter sized, there are other printers in Canon's line that do the job just as well. If you print infrequently, a laser printer might be a better option, as it doesn't have heads that will clog. If you frequently need to print larger than 13x19" (it also has no banner printing feature), you'd be better with an actual large format printer. If you are an independent artist, artist group, or small photography studio, however, I would definitely recommend this printer.

I'm an amateur photog, and this is my first large-format printer, so I'm aiming this at people in a similar spot. Other reviews delve into the more esoteric topics such pigment vs dye ink, but for people trying to decide if a printer like this is worth it? Yes definitely! This is the first time I've been able to generate prints that actually do justice to what my dSLR produces. This is the first time that the prints look as good or better on paper as they do on my PVA LCDs.

Gorgeous color reproduction, fast printing, no visible flaws even in 13x19 prints. Just make sure you use quality paper (and images w/ enough detail), and that you have space to set up this huge machine.

Fully extended, the printer covers nearly half of an IKEA desktop, about 33" at its maximum size (plus extra clearance) with the back feed opened up, or 27" normally. Fortunately, most paper can be fed from the top feed at the smaller 27" configuration (no added clearance needed), and the trays all fold into the unit for storage-- useful since the trays would probably break if one of my household felines sat on them.

Prints will only be as good as the paper you use. I've tried and been very pleased with 3rd-party Kodak Glossy Premium Photo Paper (use the paper setting Kodak specifies on the package) and also Canon Photo Paper Plus Semi-Gloss, 13 x 19 Inches. Vendors claim the best print longevity is when you use their papers and inks (for the latter paper, that's 25 years under glass, 100 years in storage). Regardless, definitely use quality paper to get results worthy of this printer's abilities.

Software installs and runs without issue on Windows XP. The straight-forward bundled Easy-PhotoPrint EX is very similar to the Easy-PhotoPrint that ships with smaller Canon printers.

My only real hesitation is the price and longevity of the supplies (eg, ink). There's a large number of smallish ink tanks (8), but they can be individually replaced. My primary complaint here is that the software only specifies that the ink level is "adequate". So after doing a 13x19 print, and 4 8.5x11's, I don't know how many more I have until I have to buy more ink. It seems a percentage-remaining wouldn't be that hard to do.

Highly recommended.

I recently got back into photography with a new dslr and had been debating whether to use a service like Snapfish to do all my printing or to get a printer and print my own. After reading many reviews I was leaning towards using an internet service but then I came across this printer and the reviews convinced me to take a chance--along with the 100 dollar rebate that brought the price down to 350. And while getting 4x6's done out of house are the cheapist way to go, those places aren't that cheap for doing 8x10, 8.5x11, 13x19, etc. I'm not saying using the Pixma will be cheaper than Snapfish printing large prints but the difference will be much less than if you just printed 4x6's. And it is very satisfying to whip out a large print of a nice pic you just took.

So far it's like people say, lab quality, if not better prints, fast quiet printing and incredibly vivid colors. Although, it does tend to oversaturate the reds on default settings so take note of that. I wouldn't expect it to do great B&W prints but I am not going to use it for that.

The only paper I've used so far is Kodak Ultra Premium glossy, 4x6 and 8.5x11. I will also try the Canon and Ilford papers.

I've only had this printer for a few weeks so I can't attest to its durability but it is a heavy and solid printer--and LARGE. Make sure you have plenty of room to put this puppy somewhere.

The only negative is the software plugin doesn't recognize my version of Photoshop (7.0) so I can't use the PS color correction plugin, which looks pretty cool.

There are some other nice printers out there for 500-1k+, but at 350 this one hit my price point and the qualtiy is fantastic.

This printer, is fast and very quiet. It allows the size flexibility of being able to print up to 13x19, which is a great asset. However, and I am not sure if it is because I bought this printer used, but the paper feed is very annoying. It has a tendency of loading multiple sheets at once, printing crooked and paper jams are a constant occurrence. This can be avoided with this printer, if you feed the paper individually by hand. Also the ink goes REALLY fast, however the quality of prints are high.