iPF+vs+Epson+3800+&+4800

=What are the pros and cons of the iPF5100 compared to the Epson 3800 and 4880?=

See also What are the differences between the iPF5100 and iPF5000? See also the [|Epson 3800 FAQ] by Eric Chan to help with your purchase decision. See also the Luminous Landscape thread [|Epson x880 series vs. Canon x100 Series]


 * ===Feature=== || ===Canon IPF5100=== || ===Epson 3800=== || ===Epson 4880=== ||
 * Ink Wasted to switch blacks || None || 1.5 ml / 4.5 ml || 90 ml / 90 ml ||
 * Time to Switch black ink || None || 1:55 / 2:55 minutes || 20 minutes / 20 minutes ||
 * Cost of Roundtrip Switch || None || $4.14 || $68.40 ||
 * Roll Feed || Yes (now built-in, was an option for the iPF5000) || No || Yes ||
 * Roll Feed Motorized || Yes (makes loading the roll extremely easy) || Not applicable || No ||
 * Roll Length Tracking || Yes (prints barcode & reads it when roll reloaded) || Not applicable || No ||
 * Roll and sheets loaded at same time || Yes (roll unloads automatically when use top manual feed) || Not applicable || No ||
 * Minimum Paper Size || 8X10 (some have printed 7X10 notecard paper from the Cassette without problems) || 4X6 || 8X10 ||
 * Maximum Print Length || 59 feet using roll feed (50 feet from printer driver) || Limited to 37.4 inches || Limited by application, OS, driver or RIP ||
 * Borderless Printing || Full borderless only available with roll printing || Yes, [|some limitations] || Check Epson info ||
 * Size of Ink Cartridges || 130 ml (starter cartridges are only 90 ml) || 80 ml || 110/220 ml ||
 * Cost of Ink per ml || 58 cents || 60 cents (vs. 86 cents for Epson 2400) || 48cents/39 cents ||
 * Ink usage || May be less due to having Red, Green and Blue colors || Uses two inks to produce Red, Green and Blue || Uses two inks to produce Red, Green and Blue ||
 * Ink use (ml/square ft) || [|About 0.5-0.8 ml per LL] 0.8-1.1 in my tests, 1.5 for darkest prints || About 1.5 ml/sq ft. || About 1.5 ml/sq ft. ||
 * Print Using Qimage || Works fine through driver, can't be used with plugin || Yes || Yes ||
 * Clogging Problems || None reported || Very few problems reported compared to earlier Epson printers || May be improved over Epson 4800 ||
 * Ink wasted on cleaning || Less than 10% per Canon; about 0.35-0.81 ml per day according to reports in this FAQ || Probably similar to 4800 || Unknown ||
 * Weight || 99 lbs. (108 lbs with roll feed) || 43 lbs. || 88 lbs. ||
 * Size || 39 X 29 X 12.5 see Dimensions || 27 X 15 X 10 inches || 33 X 30 X 14 inches ||
 * Gamut || Better in blues || Better in warmer colors || Better in warmer colors ||
 * Grayscale Range || Reported better by Luminous Landscape || Unknown || Unknown ||
 * Quality of B&W Prints || Very good, extremely neutral || Outstanding || Outstanding ||
 * Ink Water Resistant || Not as water resistant as Epson K3 on some papers per Wiki posters. If you rub a wet finger on a print some papers smudge very easily, particularly in blue areas. Other papers appear to be without problems. || Yes. || Yes. ||
 * Gloss Differential & Bronzing || [|Lowest bronzing per Scott Martin] || Excellent || Excellent ||
 * Relative Rendering Intent has Blackpoint Compensation Available || NO for plugin; workaround available; Yes if printing from Photoshop through regular 8 bit driver || Yes || Yes ||
 * Printing from Cassette || Banding in last inch on sheets fed from Cassette; fix is now available || OK || OK ||
 * Paper Transport Issues Causing Smuding/Head Strikes || No (can set vacuum/head height); //Exception:// Some have reported head strikes on Fine Art Pearl, Museo Silver Rag and Harman Gloss FB AL, which can generally be resolved by changing settings || Reported for Epson 3800 [|here] but apparently easily worked around || No (can set vacuum) ||
 * Quantity/Quality of supplied profiles || Fair/good - Canon profiles for plugin here. || Excellent || Excellent ||
 * Sound level || 60 -> 56 db at 1 meter per Luminous Landscape (a lot quieter) || Unknown || 62 db at 1 meter per Luminous Landscape ||
 * Consistency Between Printers || Canon claims inter-unit variation within 2 delta E using built-in calibration || Good || Good ||
 * Quality of Manufacturer website || Fair || Good || Good ||
 * Documentation || Fair (the reason for this Wiki) || Good || Good ||


 * Comment by Tony Bonanno:** I've had a bunch of Epsons and I print a fair amount for myself and clients. I went through three Epson 17" PRO 4000's. I've had two Epson R2400's (for small cut sheet).. I've had the 2200, R800, and the older ones back when they first came out with "photo" printers (1200, 870, etc.). So I think I can give you a little perspective. I live at 7000 ft and relatively low humidity. The fact that I've been using the 5000 for six months now WITHOUT EVEN ONE nozzle clog or nozzle issue has made the Canon's problems seem minor. You cannot believe how much ink (and money), those big Epson's (PRO 4000's) cost me in clearing out nozzle clogs and air in the ink lines. I'm talking hours of down time, and hundreds, if not thousands of dollars in wasted ink. The Canon has excellent print quality, and lots of good features. The iPF5000 would probably still be my choice.. at least at this time. Oh, I should mention that the Epsons I've owned all had banding issues from time to time.