Because these threads remain available for searching and referencing, I feel compelled to point out that these opinions regarding brands are quite subjective. Recently I went to a half-day seminar on the new large-format HP z3200, a full-day seminar on the newest Canons, researched and read reviews on Epsons. Additionally I own HP, Xerox, Canon, and Brother printers ranging in cost from a few hundred to several thousand dollars (up to 60").
The conclusion I reach is that within the past year or so, the big three inkjet manufacturers have come to offer levels of quality that are indistinguishable from one another. With 12-ink systems, fine picoliter droplets, hybrid pigment inks and faster processors one can't make a blanket statement that one is excellent and others are bad. The differences boil down to preferences for calibration workflow, media handling, consumable cost and software.
HP has led the large-format poster graphics business for many years because it has been faster. Epson has been a favorite for proofing photography because of its extremely high resolution at the sacrifice of print speed. Canon has been a distant third in sales volume. But the game is changing.
FLAAR Reports –
For many years Epson held the top market share in printers for proofing, printers for photographers, printers for giclee. Then the Hewlett Packard Z2100 and HP Z3100 began to gain significant market share for photographers and giclee. Even the Canon iPF 9000 has taken over market share in giclee as well.
If you print photographs frequently -- at least a few times per week to keep the printheads clear, Epson may be a good match. If you want to be able to leave your printer to go on vacation without returning to clogging issues, perhaps HP is a good fit. But honestly, if I were in the market for a printer right now, my money would very likely be on the Canon imagePROGRAF series.
Attempts to bring this high-end technology below $1000 results in trade-offs. Unfortunately, that's where most people form there opinions about brands. In my "opinion," HP can't make a decent printer under a grand and I am not fond of their color laser printers. Xerox can sure put together a great laser printer but the paper path is highly complex, requiring dozens of consumables; an extended service contract (within first 90 days of purchase) is highly recommended. Brother printers offer good hardware features but software is Windows-centric with Aqua buttons slapped on. With high-praise reviews still topping the Google search pages for the now 14-month old, sub-$200 Pixma MX850, Canon managed to prove it can offer quality on the low end.
Still an interesting read for people in the market for printers is an article I wrote in December of 2007 entitled: "
How Much Is that Printer in the Window?" with its sidebar on "Ink Price Per Gallon."
Full-disclosure: I benefit from the sale of commercial products advertised on the linked website.
