75 of 89 people found the following review helpful
Network Equipped version of Pro 9000 mkII,
This review is from: Canon PIXMA PRO-100 Color Professional Inkjet Photo Printer (Office Product)
Vine Customer Review of Free Product (What's this?)
I think what most of you will want to know is what the difference are between this Pro100 and the previous Pro 9000 Mark II. The first regrettable difference is that it uses different ink cartridges. They are the same size, but have a different number. I imagine they changed the electronic interface or something, and they also use 2 additional gray inks.
The second, and what I think is the more important difference, is they added both wireless and wired network interface. This allows you to put this massive printer in a side room or somewhere out of the way if you don't have a lot of room by your computer, and it also means all the computers in your house can easily use it to print without sharing it between computers.
Printing on the luster paper samples that were included with the printer, I couldn't tell a difference in detail between this printer and my old Pro 9000 MkII. Even for my black and white test shot the shadows and details looked virtually identical. For my color print, my Pro 9000 MkII always had a magenta cast to it. I think that is gone, but it might be slightly green now. Both can be calibrated, but that takes a significant effort. I mainly use mine for printing contest photos, so as long as they look fine by themselves I don't care too much if they are color matched. Again, detail wise I couldn't identify which print came from which printer.
So bottom line is I don't see much reason to upgrade from the Pro 9000 MkII unless you want wireless/wired network printing. Also be aware that this printer is about 1" larger in every dimension than the old 9000 MkII which was very large.
As far as home printing is concerned, I have won several contests with my old Pro 9000 MkII so it does a good enough job for prints. You really can't tell them from a pro shop for the most part. Longevity wise, my prints look fine after a year from the 9000 (similar Dye based) and are supposed to last 100 years. Although I don't believe that, as long as you buy genuine inks you should get pretty good life out of them. If you really need archival prints you should probably look at a pigment based printer.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-4 of 4 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jul 24, 2013 8:18:01 PM PDT
Shouldn't a Vine review be more comprehensive?
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 24, 2013 9:12:49 PM PDT
Eric T says:
Why? This is Amazon, not a in depth review site like DP Review or some place. You have to understand the Vine program gets products to users so they generate reviews (good or bad). These are no different than if any customer bought the product and provided their opinion, so I don't know why you would expect more from a vine review.
I bought the Pro 9000 MKII with my money and used it for a year or so. My review for the Pro 100 I give my opinion and what the main differences are with the MKII and why I would consider buying one. I noticed no improvement in BW or color prints vs my old MKII so I don't really see that as a reason to buy it. What more do you want, a novel?
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 25, 2013 4:00:41 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 25, 2013 4:00:49 PM PDT
Eric T says:
PS What is it you think I missed and I would be happy to add it to the review?
Posted on Aug 26, 2013 8:56:50 PM PDT
Some Guy says:
Thanks for the review. It answered questions I had about the two printers.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›