Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
What are the main differences?
How do they compare to the Epson R300?
Many Thanks
Mike
What are the main differences?
How do they compare to the Epson R300?
Many Thanks
Mike
How much better is the Canon IP5000 over the IP4000
- Thread starter Mikey
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Dual Channel PCI Express
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
The IP5000 relative to the IP4000 has higher resolution, significantly
better text and business printing, marginally inferior photo printing
and is slower. Both are better than the R300.
My friend, who bought an Epson R300 even though he knew that the Canon
IP4000 produced better text and photos, did so because CD Direct
Printing was an absolute requirement. That was the main reason for
buying a photo inkjet.
Mikey wrote:
>What are the main differences?
>
>How do they compare to the Epson R300?
>
>Many Thanks
>
>Mike
>
>
>
>
The IP5000 relative to the IP4000 has higher resolution, significantly
better text and business printing, marginally inferior photo printing
and is slower. Both are better than the R300.
My friend, who bought an Epson R300 even though he knew that the Canon
IP4000 produced better text and photos, did so because CD Direct
Printing was an absolute requirement. That was the main reason for
buying a photo inkjet.
Mikey wrote:
>What are the main differences?
>
>How do they compare to the Epson R300?
>
>Many Thanks
>
>Mike
>
>
>
>
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
In article measekite says...
> The droplet size on the IP5000 is 1 picoliter and uses higher
> resolution. The text is significantly better when looking a the same
> thing side by side. That does NOT translate to the photos where the
> IP4000 is marginally better but much faster.
>
That is what's wrong with the PCMag result.
Ordinary black Text on both the iP4000 and iP5000 on plain paper
settings use the same pigmented ink and the same 600x600 resolution set
of nozzles. Nothing to do with 1 picoliter, probably not even as small
as 2 pl. The Black pigmented ink nozzles aren't used on PHOTO paper
settings.
Business publications on plain paper should look the same.
On PHOTO paper settings the iP4000 can achieve 2pl 4800 x 1200
resolution and the iP5000 on highest quality 1pl 9600 x 2400.
The iP5000 on high quality should be better than the iP4000 at the
expense of speed.
Has anyone else tested the 2 printers together and got the same results?
In article measekite says...
> The droplet size on the IP5000 is 1 picoliter and uses higher
> resolution. The text is significantly better when looking a the same
> thing side by side. That does NOT translate to the photos where the
> IP4000 is marginally better but much faster.
>
That is what's wrong with the PCMag result.
Ordinary black Text on both the iP4000 and iP5000 on plain paper
settings use the same pigmented ink and the same 600x600 resolution set
of nozzles. Nothing to do with 1 picoliter, probably not even as small
as 2 pl. The Black pigmented ink nozzles aren't used on PHOTO paper
settings.
Business publications on plain paper should look the same.
On PHOTO paper settings the iP4000 can achieve 2pl 4800 x 1200
resolution and the iP5000 on highest quality 1pl 9600 x 2400.
The iP5000 on high quality should be better than the iP4000 at the
expense of speed.
Has anyone else tested the 2 printers together and got the same results?
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet size.
On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although I
can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
I'm more confused that ever.
Which one should I buy?
The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
or
The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
Cheers
"colinco" <colincomma@yawhoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cbc72a1c0fcc1aa989901@news.xtra.co.nz...
> In article measekite says...
> > The droplet size on the IP5000 is 1 picoliter and uses higher
> > resolution. The text is significantly better when looking a the same
> > thing side by side. That does NOT translate to the photos where the
> > IP4000 is marginally better but much faster.
> >
> That is what's wrong with the PCMag result.
> Ordinary black Text on both the iP4000 and iP5000 on plain paper
> settings use the same pigmented ink and the same 600x600 resolution set
> of nozzles. Nothing to do with 1 picoliter, probably not even as small
> as 2 pl. The Black pigmented ink nozzles aren't used on PHOTO paper
> settings.
>
> Business publications on plain paper should look the same.
>
> On PHOTO paper settings the iP4000 can achieve 2pl 4800 x 1200
> resolution and the iP5000 on highest quality 1pl 9600 x 2400.
>
> The iP5000 on high quality should be better than the iP4000 at the
> expense of speed.
>
> Has anyone else tested the 2 printers together and got the same results?
I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet size.
On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although I
can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
I'm more confused that ever.
Which one should I buy?
The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
or
The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
Cheers
"colinco" <colincomma@yawhoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1cbc72a1c0fcc1aa989901@news.xtra.co.nz...
> In article measekite says...
> > The droplet size on the IP5000 is 1 picoliter and uses higher
> > resolution. The text is significantly better when looking a the same
> > thing side by side. That does NOT translate to the photos where the
> > IP4000 is marginally better but much faster.
> >
> That is what's wrong with the PCMag result.
> Ordinary black Text on both the iP4000 and iP5000 on plain paper
> settings use the same pigmented ink and the same 600x600 resolution set
> of nozzles. Nothing to do with 1 picoliter, probably not even as small
> as 2 pl. The Black pigmented ink nozzles aren't used on PHOTO paper
> settings.
>
> Business publications on plain paper should look the same.
>
> On PHOTO paper settings the iP4000 can achieve 2pl 4800 x 1200
> resolution and the iP5000 on highest quality 1pl 9600 x 2400.
>
> The iP5000 on high quality should be better than the iP4000 at the
> expense of speed.
>
> Has anyone else tested the 2 printers together and got the same results?
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
In article <4251c2a7$0$27856$61c65585@un-2park-reader-
01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au>, caitlin_online_spamtrap@hotmail.com says...
> As far as I know that is what ONE review has said. I wonder if that could
> have been on an early review model - and some kinks could have been ironed
> out in the meantime? As said - based on the specks it just doesn;t make
> sense. I think someone would need to look at two photo prints side by side
> to verify this. I have my doubts it is true (Though I think the image
> quality of my IP4000 is very good)
>
>
When I bought my IP4000 I also Bought an IP5000.
There was not a big enough difference (or any that I could see) in the
quality from one to the other.
I returned the ip 5000 and got a second ip4000.
This was BEFORE I read any reviews.
Im sure there is some printing job for which the 5000 is better, it just
didn't impress me enought to be worth the extra $70 (US) (the price
difference at the time).
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
In article <4251c2a7$0$27856$61c65585@un-2park-reader-
01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au>, caitlin_online_spamtrap@hotmail.com says...
> As far as I know that is what ONE review has said. I wonder if that could
> have been on an early review model - and some kinks could have been ironed
> out in the meantime? As said - based on the specks it just doesn;t make
> sense. I think someone would need to look at two photo prints side by side
> to verify this. I have my doubts it is true (Though I think the image
> quality of my IP4000 is very good)
>
>
When I bought my IP4000 I also Bought an IP5000.
There was not a big enough difference (or any that I could see) in the
quality from one to the other.
I returned the ip 5000 and got a second ip4000.
This was BEFORE I read any reviews.
Im sure there is some printing job for which the 5000 is better, it just
didn't impress me enought to be worth the extra $70 (US) (the price
difference at the time).
--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
PCmag tested these 2 printers against each other.
The small droplet size with the better resolution helped make the IP5000
substantially better at business documents and graphics. For some
reason the IP4000 produce marginally better photos.
The IP4000 was faster. It is a better value if you have a choice. I
bought the IP4000 and am glad I did.
Mikey wrote:
>I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet size.
>On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although I
>can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
>
>I'm more confused that ever.
>
>Which one should I buy?
>
>The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
>or
>The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
>
>Cheers
>
>"colinco" <colincomma@yawhoo.com> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1cbc72a1c0fcc1aa989901@news.xtra.co.nz...
>
>
>>In article measekite says...
>>
>>
>>>The droplet size on the IP5000 is 1 picoliter and uses higher
>>>resolution. The text is significantly better when looking a the same
>>>thing side by side. That does NOT translate to the photos where the
>>>IP4000 is marginally better but much faster.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>That is what's wrong with the PCMag result.
>>Ordinary black Text on both the iP4000 and iP5000 on plain paper
>>settings use the same pigmented ink and the same 600x600 resolution set
>>of nozzles. Nothing to do with 1 picoliter, probably not even as small
>>as 2 pl. The Black pigmented ink nozzles aren't used on PHOTO paper
>>settings.
>>
>>Business publications on plain paper should look the same.
>>
>>On PHOTO paper settings the iP4000 can achieve 2pl 4800 x 1200
>>resolution and the iP5000 on highest quality 1pl 9600 x 2400.
>>
>>The iP5000 on high quality should be better than the iP4000 at the
>>expense of speed.
>>
>>Has anyone else tested the 2 printers together and got the same results?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
PCmag tested these 2 printers against each other.
The small droplet size with the better resolution helped make the IP5000
substantially better at business documents and graphics. For some
reason the IP4000 produce marginally better photos.
The IP4000 was faster. It is a better value if you have a choice. I
bought the IP4000 and am glad I did.
Mikey wrote:
>I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet size.
>On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although I
>can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
>
>I'm more confused that ever.
>
>Which one should I buy?
>
>The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
>or
>The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
>
>Cheers
>
>"colinco" <colincomma@yawhoo.com> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1cbc72a1c0fcc1aa989901@news.xtra.co.nz...
>
>
>>In article measekite says...
>>
>>
>>>The droplet size on the IP5000 is 1 picoliter and uses higher
>>>resolution. The text is significantly better when looking a the same
>>>thing side by side. That does NOT translate to the photos where the
>>>IP4000 is marginally better but much faster.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>That is what's wrong with the PCMag result.
>>Ordinary black Text on both the iP4000 and iP5000 on plain paper
>>settings use the same pigmented ink and the same 600x600 resolution set
>>of nozzles. Nothing to do with 1 picoliter, probably not even as small
>>as 2 pl. The Black pigmented ink nozzles aren't used on PHOTO paper
>>settings.
>>
>>Business publications on plain paper should look the same.
>>
>>On PHOTO paper settings the iP4000 can achieve 2pl 4800 x 1200
>>resolution and the iP5000 on highest quality 1pl 9600 x 2400.
>>
>>The iP5000 on high quality should be better than the iP4000 at the
>>expense of speed.
>>
>>Has anyone else tested the 2 printers together and got the same results?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
Thanks to everyone who answered.
Will be getting the IP4000,.
Now to pick a good compatible ink. At 99p a cart it's a bargain.
Thanks again.
Mike
"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2Dj4e.15711$zl.10749@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> PCmag tested these 2 printers against each other.
>
> The small droplet size with the better resolution helped make the IP5000
> substantially better at business documents and graphics. For some
> reason the IP4000 produce marginally better photos.
>
> The IP4000 was faster. It is a better value if you have a choice. I
> bought the IP4000 and am glad I did.
>
> Mikey wrote:
>
> >I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet
size.
> >On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although
I
> >can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
> >
> >I'm more confused that ever.
> >
> >Which one should I buy?
> >
> >The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
> >or
> >The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
> >
> >Cheers
> >
> >"colinco" <colincomma@yawhoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:MPG.1cbc72a1c0fcc1aa989901@news.xtra.co.nz...
> >
> >
> >>In article measekite says...
> >>
> >>
> >>>The droplet size on the IP5000 is 1 picoliter and uses higher
> >>>resolution. The text is significantly better when looking a the same
> >>>thing side by side. That does NOT translate to the photos where the
> >>>IP4000 is marginally better but much faster.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>That is what's wrong with the PCMag result.
> >>Ordinary black Text on both the iP4000 and iP5000 on plain paper
> >>settings use the same pigmented ink and the same 600x600 resolution set
> >>of nozzles. Nothing to do with 1 picoliter, probably not even as small
> >>as 2 pl. The Black pigmented ink nozzles aren't used on PHOTO paper
> >>settings.
> >>
> >>Business publications on plain paper should look the same.
> >>
> >>On PHOTO paper settings the iP4000 can achieve 2pl 4800 x 1200
> >>resolution and the iP5000 on highest quality 1pl 9600 x 2400.
> >>
> >>The iP5000 on high quality should be better than the iP4000 at the
> >>expense of speed.
> >>
> >>Has anyone else tested the 2 printers together and got the same results?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
Thanks to everyone who answered.
Will be getting the IP4000,.
Now to pick a good compatible ink. At 99p a cart it's a bargain.
Thanks again.
Mike
"measekite" <measekite@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2Dj4e.15711$zl.10749@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> PCmag tested these 2 printers against each other.
>
> The small droplet size with the better resolution helped make the IP5000
> substantially better at business documents and graphics. For some
> reason the IP4000 produce marginally better photos.
>
> The IP4000 was faster. It is a better value if you have a choice. I
> bought the IP4000 and am glad I did.
>
> Mikey wrote:
>
> >I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet
size.
> >On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although
I
> >can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
> >
> >I'm more confused that ever.
> >
> >Which one should I buy?
> >
> >The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
> >or
> >The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
> >
> >Cheers
> >
> >"colinco" <colincomma@yawhoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:MPG.1cbc72a1c0fcc1aa989901@news.xtra.co.nz...
> >
> >
> >>In article measekite says...
> >>
> >>
> >>>The droplet size on the IP5000 is 1 picoliter and uses higher
> >>>resolution. The text is significantly better when looking a the same
> >>>thing side by side. That does NOT translate to the photos where the
> >>>IP4000 is marginally better but much faster.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>That is what's wrong with the PCMag result.
> >>Ordinary black Text on both the iP4000 and iP5000 on plain paper
> >>settings use the same pigmented ink and the same 600x600 resolution set
> >>of nozzles. Nothing to do with 1 picoliter, probably not even as small
> >>as 2 pl. The Black pigmented ink nozzles aren't used on PHOTO paper
> >>settings.
> >>
> >>Business publications on plain paper should look the same.
> >>
> >>On PHOTO paper settings the iP4000 can achieve 2pl 4800 x 1200
> >>resolution and the iP5000 on highest quality 1pl 9600 x 2400.
> >>
> >>The iP5000 on high quality should be better than the iP4000 at the
> >>expense of speed.
> >>
> >>Has anyone else tested the 2 printers together and got the same results?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
In article Mikey says...
> I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet size.
> On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although I
> can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
>
> I'm more confused that ever.
>
> Which one should I buy?
>
> The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
> or
> The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
>
> Cheers
>
Get the 4000 save £40.00 and you probably won't ever notice the
differance. Local stores have the Canon swatches of 6x4 sample prints
from each model, all cunningly different so direct comparisons are
difficult but all acceptable. Concentrate on the subject, that has more
impact.
In article Mikey says...
> I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet size.
> On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although I
> can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
>
> I'm more confused that ever.
>
> Which one should I buy?
>
> The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
> or
> The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
>
> Cheers
>
Get the 4000 save £40.00 and you probably won't ever notice the
differance. Local stores have the Canon swatches of 6x4 sample prints
from each model, all cunningly different so direct comparisons are
difficult but all acceptable. Concentrate on the subject, that has more
impact.
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
colinco wrote:
>In article Mikey says...
>
>
>>I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet size.
>>On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although I
>>can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
>>
>>I'm more confused that ever.
>>
>>Which one should I buy?
>>
>>The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
>>or
>>The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>Get the 4000 save £40.00 and you probably won't ever notice the
>differance. Local stores have the Canon swatches of 6x4 sample prints
>from each model, all cunningly different so direct comparisons are
>difficult but all acceptable. Concentrate on the subject, that has more
>impact.
>
>
The choice is really an easy one. If the majority of you printing is
business type documents and graphics then go for the IP5000. If the
majority is photos then go for the IP4000.
colinco wrote:
>In article Mikey says...
>
>
>>I thought the IP5000 would be higher quality with the smaller droplet size.
>>On Canon's website the speed of the two printers are identical, although I
>>can understand that the smaller droplet size may slow the printer down.
>>
>>I'm more confused that ever.
>>
>>Which one should I buy?
>>
>>The IP4000 @ £92.00 Delivered
>>or
>>The IP5000 @ £132.76 Delivered
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>Get the 4000 save £40.00 and you probably won't ever notice the
>differance. Local stores have the Canon swatches of 6x4 sample prints
>from each model, all cunningly different so direct comparisons are
>difficult but all acceptable. Concentrate on the subject, that has more
>impact.
>
>
The choice is really an easy one. If the majority of you printing is
business type documents and graphics then go for the IP5000. If the
majority is photos then go for the IP4000.
Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)
In article measekite says...
>
> >According to Neil Slade MIS and colorbat inks are from the same mfgr.
> >
> Do you know who the manufacturer is?
>
I've seen the name Image Specialists mentioned whoever they are.
In article measekite says...
>
> >According to Neil Slade MIS and colorbat inks are from the same mfgr.
> >
> Do you know who the manufacturer is?
>
I've seen the name Image Specialists mentioned whoever they are.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
[SOLVED] Is it safe to use a recapped PSU for a long time ?- Started by zwtch_17
- Replies: 7
-
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Question Nvidia RTX 4060 windows night light is reset constantly
- Latest: ohio_buckeye
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram