Canon PIXMA PRO-10 Color Professional Inkjet Photo Printer

Comment

I have these two pro-photo printers from Canon and Im going to take advantage of this opportunity to not only review them as to their capabilities, but to compare them to each other as to advantages and disadvantages. One (the Pro-10) uses a pigment-based ink system; the other (the Pro-100) uses a dye-based ink system. There are pros and cons to each of those types of inks, and the performance you can expect from the respective printers. For background, I originally entered the realm of pro photo printers about a decade or so ago with the Canon Pro-9000, which used dye-based inks. This was in the era before Canon developed their ChromaLife dye inks, and those early inks werent rated highly for longevity, an issue of great import to most who print pro-level (or prosumer) photos, and an issue of which I wasnt yet informed because I was a newbie to digital photography. It was an excellent printer as to print quality, but when Canon came out with the first line of ChromaLife inks, I educated myself on the subject, and since the Pro-9000 wasnt able to accept the new inks, I decided to switch to an HP 8750, which used Vivera inks which are highly rated for longevity. The HP 8750 has served me very well for the intervening years, but they stopped supporting driver and software upgrades with Windows XP, so when I transitioned to Win 7 several functions of that printer were no longer available. A very strange - and alienating - decision on the part of HP, which prompted me to finally switch to the new Canon printers. As far as set-up, these two Canon printers are nearly identical. The set-up is easy and intuitive, but time-consuming as these are complex pieces of equipment with sophisticated software. You can install from either the included discs, or on-line at Canons website. As I mentioned, the Pro-10 is a pigment ink system and uses 10 inks, including several different photo grays and an Optimizer. The Pro-100 uses an 8-ink dye-based system. My understanding is that the Pro-100 approaches blacks using a different print strategy from the Pro-10. It does have 3 photo black cartridges, but also uses other colors to create grays. Well come back to this later. Both units can print directly from your handheld devices (smart phones, tablets, etc.) via Bluetooth connectivity, a terrific and innovative convenience, as well as from your other devices which are part of your wireless LAN. An almost universal problem in digital photo printing is the phenomenon of the finished prints looking different from what the user sees on his monitor screen; the finished prints are typically darker. Trying to get matching prints and screen image usually entails extensive monitor calibration, which in my experience means Im looking at what I consider to be a pretty dark monitor image. Canon addresses this issue with an included program called Optimum Image Generating System (OIG). This program works in conjunction with later versions of Photoshop and Lightroom. My Photoshop is an older non-supported version, so I used in it Lightroom, and found it to be surprisingly effective in addressing the issue; the prints came out much closer to what I was seeing on the screen - without a lot of tweaking - than Ive been used to up to this point. We have to bear in mind that some prints are going to be trickier than others, and the OIG may give mixed results - YMMV - but this system is a HUGE step forward in home printing technology. Kudos to Canon for that alone! The Pro-10 and Pro-100 have very different price points, and for that to be so there must be some significant differences between them, so lets take a look at those. Of course, those differences all revolve around the different ink technologies: pigment (Pro-10) versus dye (Pro-100). Lets start with ink cost. The Pro-10 uses 10 ink cartridges, and a full set of inks here on Amazon runs roughly $150. The Pro-100 uses 8 cartridges for a total cost of about $125. Not much difference in price for the ink; your price per print will probably be roughly equivalent. According to Canons documentation the Pro-100 uses smaller ink nozzles, probably possible due to the differences in the physical properties of the different inks. Youd think that this would lead to a higher level of fine detail by the Pro-100, but in a side-by-side comparison of prints of the same picture from each printer I couldnt discern any difference between the two. Print speed: Both units will create true borderless prints up to 13" X 19"; the Pro-100 will do it in less than half the time the Pro-10 takes, under 2 minutes versus about 5 minutes. To me this is a non-issue, but there it is, FYI. Color prints: Both printers produce color prints that are absolutely beautiful. Color transitions are subtle and utilize the full gamut of shadings. To me, the prints from the dye-based Pro-100 seem to "pop" just a bit more, probably again due to the physical property differences between dyes and pigments. But both produce true gallery-quality prints that anyone would be proud to display. B&W prints: This is one of the bigger differences between the two. The B&W prints from the Pro-100 are also beautiful, but when held to a side-by-side comparison with B&Ws from the Pro-10, the pigment systems superiority in the blacks becomes apparent: Deeper, richer and cleaner. Again bear in mind: these are differences noted in that side-by-side comparison. As a stand-alone, the B&Ws from the Pro-100 are still perfectly acceptable, though there is a slight "tinge" noticeable when light reflects off the print from an angle, probably due to that grays "strategy" I mentioned earlier. Print longevity: Probably the biggest difference between the two. Both inks will yield 100+ years longevity when stored in an album in the dark. Who cares about that? Lets face it; its display life - on the wall, under glass - that really counts in this department, and thats where the pigment inks enjoy a clear edge. Wilhelm Image Research is the industry standard for image longevity. Theyve conducted tests on the Lucia pigment ink system that yield results showing that display life for the pigment inks exceeds 75 years. Wilhelm hasnt yet published findings on the ChromaLife100+ dye system, but on their website Canon published their own testing research indicating a display life of approximately 30 years. Theres absolutely no question about it; when it comes to print longevity, the pigment-based Pro-10 wins running away. If thats an important issue to you, as it is to me, youll definitely want to factor it into your buying decision. In summary, both of these fine machines are at the top of their class of the pro printers currently on the market; 5+ stars to both. A slight edge to the Pro-100 for color vibrancy; a slight edge to the Pro-10 for B&W performance. The biggest difference is in print longevity which may or may not be important to each individual buyer. Kudos to Canon for two exceedingly fine offerings.

Show more

Comment

Please skip the intro if you want to go directly to the review, however intro can put a little light on the review methodology. In any case get ready for lengthy review. Intro Here is a little background information on me before the actual review so people can look at this review from the clear point of view. I do extensive reviews rarely and usually only either if I really like the product and want others to find out about it or if I am really disappointed in a product and want to warn others. I am by no means a professional photographer, however I have been on and off serious amateur photographer for almost 20 years now, going back all the way to 35mm film SLR cameras. I got into digital photography as soon as first, under 1 MP cameras, became available. Over the years I have gone through several inkjet and laser printers and my previous one is Canon i9900. This is the one that I will be making comparisons to, if any. Few last words of this introduction. When it comes to photography I consider myself purist and pragmatic in a sense that I am not a pixel peeper, I dont do very extensive technical tests with test sheets and such. All I really care is how photo looks to my eyes and eyes of other people I care about. I also tend to have realistic expectations when it comes to the results of amateur photography. I do not expect every picture to be perfect and every print to be perfect. This is something I carried over from film photography and digital makes it so much more cost effective as you can take hundreds of pictures and pick the ones you really like. Review of Canon PIXMA PRO-10. I am writing this because I am compelled to spread the word about this little wonder and clear some of misunderstandings and expectations when it comes to this product. My setup. Custom build Intel I7 PC with 16GB of RAM, SSD as system disk and Windows 7 Professional installed. Monitor is Samsung S32D850T. It is not IPS panel but AMVA+ (you can look up the differences) but so far I am very happy with it. Monitor is calibrated by yours truly, manually and by my own eyes with calibration software but not any colorimeter. Again, I am not a pixel peeper and go by look and feel. All test photos so far were taken with either Canon 5D Mark II or Canon 40D and printed directly from Canon Digital Photo Professional software. First impressions. It is heavy, which is not a problem for me. It takes quite a bit of space so make sure that you have plenty of desk space, again not a problem for me. It comes with full set of 10 inks and as far as I can tell these are full PGI-72 inks and not some priming half capacity inks. Set up is not very difficult but I am technically inclined person so take it with the grain of salt. The only thing I had a slight issue with is setting up WIFI connection directly without USB cable connected. There is such an option but I could not get it to work initially so I gave up and used the option with USB cable connected. Once set up you can disconnect USB cable and WIFI works like a charm. Make sure you can place printer close to your computer or have a spare long USB cable as cable provided by Canon is really short. This could be a gripe for some but I do not care as I use WIFI and I also have other USB cables I could use if I wanted to. Once you put the print head and the inks in the printer goes through a cycle of priming and alignment, which you can print on regular paper. Initial test prints. First test printouts were done on 4x6 Costco Glossy Photo paper. Very impressive, colors very natural and vibrant but not too vibrant, matching the picture on the monitor color wise but little darker. When it comes to color reproduction this is exactly what I remember the scene was when I was taking the pictures. I printed same pictures on the same paper for comparison on Canon i9900 (dye inks) and the colors are more colorful but do not match those of the actual subject. It is not that they just popping out more or anything but it seems that the color space shifted a little or something. PRO-10 colors seem much more natural to me. More test prints including large format and various papers. I had some Canon Glossy Plus paper but ordered 8.5x11 and 13x19 of Canon Pro Luster and 8.5x11 of Canon Pro Platinum. Also when ordering some spare inks from Canon I got some free 5x7 and 4x6 Canon Glossy Plus II paper. I printed some 8.5x11 of Costco Glossy, Cannon Glossy Plus, Luster and Platinum. I must say I am very impressed with handling on Costco paper and totally blown away by prints on Luster paper. With my Canon i9900 printer I used to print primarily on glossy but small sizes of 4x6 and 5x7, sometimes 8.5x11 and greater but not too often. I never knew what I was missing by not using Luster paper. For me, combination of PRO-10 and Luster paper is just mind blowing. 8.5x11 look glorious but 13x19 look out of this world because they are bigger and you can see so much more in the print. I mean mind blowing for amateur printing at home in this printer price range. So far I printed a lot of landscapes, sunsets (one of my favorite subjects), people in landscapes, people in various situations, underground caverns (really good color reproduction) and some cityscapes. I framed one of my very `moody sunsets 13x19 prints in inexpensive matted frame from IKEA and my wife put it up on the wall. Friend of hers came over couple days later and noticed this on the wall and thought my wife bought it at the store. Average person cannot tell the difference. To be honest with you if the same picture was actually printed for mass store sales I do not think I could tell the difference, maybe the paper quality in mass prints would cause it to actually look even worse. I certainly have seen much worse in stores. When I print using this printer my daughter constantly accuses me of editing the photos because she says they look too good. All these prints were printed directly from DPP from RAW format and with no adjustments to the pictures themselves. Again, as a purist I do not tinker with my pictures much, if at all. Id rather take 100 photos and have 10 come out the way I intended then tinker in photo editing software. Digital photography saves me a lot of money on developing unusable pictures but I do not take it as an excuse to just press shutter button away with no sense of what I am shooting or what I want to get out of scene or subject. It sure frustrates my wife when I take pictures because she says it takes forever but she is changing her mind now after seeing some of them printed in large format. She almost never sits down with me at the computer to look at them and 4x6 do not give most of photos enough justice. One thing that I have noticed that the brightness of prints is sometimes but not consistently darker than the screen. When the scene is darker to start with, sometimes I have to adjust in the Canon Print Studio Pro plug-inn to brighten it up a bit. However, when the scene is bright to start with, usually no adjustment is necessary. So far I have used ICC profiles with Perceptual setting and not played much with other options, especially `environmental white balancing options but will do that later. At the moment I am more than happy with the prints as they are. When you print photos with a lot of white make sure that you use option of covering entire image with Chroma ink, otherwise you may get weird `holes of unevenness in the picture, which can be mostly noticed if you look at the angle or if the surroundings of this spot are in contrast with white. It is especially noticeable on glossy paper. If you use auto option you will not save much of Chroma as it will be used on most of the print anyways, unless it is mostly white. I have not tried black and white prints just yet so not sure how Chroma affects/helps with that. I would use matte paper for black and white anyways so the Chroma should really not be needed as it is supposed to reduce glossiness variations. UPDATE: I have printed some black and white and here are few comments on that. First off, Chroma is not used on matte paper. Second, I was wrong about printing black and white only on matte paper. I printed few shots of the moon I took with my telescope and I thought it looked great on matte 8.5x11. Then just for the heck of it I printed on Luster (with full Chroma coverage) and I was really blown away by what it looked like. This is one of my most favorite prints I have made so far. I cannot believe I actually made this shot and I know the conditions were not ideal and I can do much better. I was wrong and I will print a lot of black and white on Luster paper going forward. To summarize the prints. Color reproduction, color transitions, color coverage, trueness to original subject, skin tones, shadows, etc. are all outstanding in my book. I could not be happier. It makes me want to print again and made me go through my photo library to find the next printing subject. It is not night and day compared to my Canon i9900 but a noticeable difference, especially when it comes to being true to the original scene and subject combination. If you shoot or make HDRs and you want them to really pop out of the frame then you might want to consider dye based printer but to me this does not look natural and if I wanted to do that I still have my trusted Canon i9900. Software, paper handling, print speed, etc. The printer comes with the driver that allows for many print parameter changes as well as monitoring the ink level. The ink level monitor works fine on WIFI connection, no USB connection needed. The ink level indicator is somewhat helpful but seems to move in ¼ increments. I would prefer much finer increments, especially when I start running down to the bottom of the ink tanks. Included is also Canon Print Studio Pro plug-in that works in DPP. Canon says it also works in Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom but I do not use either so I cannot comment. If I edit my photos I use DPP and if need be I use Corel Paint Shop Pro X6 Ultimate. Unfortunately even though Paint Shop Pro is an incredible piece of software it is not supported by Canon. I would encourage anyone to download trial version and see for themselves how much you get for much less money. I do have older version of Photoshop because I got it at very high employee discount but I see no reason to be paying this much for any newer version after discovering Paint Shop Pro. The paper feed is pretty much straight forward and problem free. So far I have not had to use the rear feeder yet, just the top feeder, which worked just fine up to 13x19. I think I would use rear if trying to feed fine art paper (thicker) or maybe if trying to feed little longer paper to prevent bending. Canon says up to 19 inch length is supported but I heard of others feeding a bit longer. Print time is on a longer side comparing to my `old Canon i9900. Not that I care but you need to be a little patient, especially with big formats. Granted I printed everything on the finest setting and did not try to do any printing with fast setting. I will not give you time measurements here because they are pretty close to Canon estimates in the specification sheet. The overall cost including ink and paper cost. First off, I bought it on Amazon when it was 599.99 USD. This combined with Canon 250 USD rebate (already claimed) would give me the cost of 349.99 USD. For what you get as a product it is incredible value in my personal opinion. The paper cost depends of what paper you will use and/or prefer. If you shop wisely or take advantage of the free paper offers from Canon it is more than reasonable. If you are using larger formats then you might want to shop around but Canon direct is only reasonably priced on bulk options and on very few papers. Most papers are more expensive than on Amazon. If you get addicted to Canon Pro Luster, like I did, then I think if you buy wisely it is very reasonable cost for the quality you get. For 4x6 I would urge you to try non-Canon options. Costco 4x6 is cheap and good quality at this size is very good. They also sell 8.5x11 but only in Glossy and in this size I prefer Luster. Now the big elephant in the room, which is the ink cost. Everyone is always griping about how much it costs to print on this or that printer. I approach it from the different angle, so before I take it on actual ink usage and cost here is my 5 cents. If I get my prints to look amazing like they do from this printer and compare to other options, mainly processing through service outlets and consider prices they are charging and not being able to proof it or print again right away if I dont like it, then it is not even fair comparison. All I would now worry about is only whether the inks will be always available at the current prices and whether the printer will hold up and when I need to change the head. I could not find a reliable source of print heads just yet, so I do not know how much they are. The famous auction site had them ranging from 60 to 80 USD but I am considering buying another printer instead just in case but only one rebate per customer so maybe I will not do it. After all they might make even better printer in the future. The individual tanks are 15 USD each and you can get slight brake if you buy 4 packs and much bigger price brake if you buy 10 pack. I would suggest buying one additional 10 pack with the printer and then buy smaller packs or individual when you figure out your usage. Now when it comes to the usage, it is kind of dependent of what you print. The individual tanks are used differently depending on the photo content. My below usage is based on the prints I made, which had a high percentage of sunsets with intense shadows, darker colors and also the sun itself. The two tanks that initially were being used the fastest for me were Grey and then Chroma, in that order. Initially I printed few prints without full Chroma coverage but then I consistently used full coverage. So I stocked up on additional Grey (individual) and Chroma tanks (value pack). If you order directly from Canon shipping is free and they seem to be running a lot of promotions lately. So far, I got two free photo albums (pretty nice) and bunch of free paper, mostly 4x6 Glossy Plus II but also 5x7 Glossy Plus II and 8.5x11 Matte. After printing the following number of prints: 4x6 - 18 5x7 - 6 8.5x11 - 8 13x14 - 5 Here were my tank levels: PM-75% PC-75% Y-75% M-100% R-100% PBK-75% C-100% CO-50% MBK-100% GR-50% I may not be a pixel peeper but I do analyze how much things cost me for what I get out of them. Using not very advanced mathematics, it cost me 26.4USD of ink to print the above mentioned prints, which comes down to around 0.01USD per square inch. In layman terms it means 0.24 USD per 4x6 print, 0.35USD per 5x7, 0.94USD per 8.5x11 and 2.45USD per 13x19. If you include cost of paper this means that volume prints of sizes below 5x7 are much cheaper at Costco. Bigger sizes come out to the similar price. Comparing the quality of 4x6 prints at Costco to this printer, Costco is no match. I never did large prints but I would assume it might get worse with those. Also no option of printing from RAW image. I think they only accept JPG of TIFF. This all is assuming the ink levels are due to the actual printing and not head priming and that the usage levels will continue in similar fashion. Also worth mentioning that as per one of the reviews advice I keep the printer switched on at all times, supposedly to prevent from priming the printer head whenever it is switched on. Summary. Great printer and you get much more than you pay for when the printer is concerned. With ink and paper I think you still get more than you pay for but that depends on your prints and what you are comparing them to. For the quality and size of the prints I get I am more than willing to pay for the ink. This printer will not make photos look better than they are, maybe with an exception of times when size of the print is 8.5x11 and beyond and type of the paper used (especially Luster) adds additional dimension to the photos. I would definitely buy this printer again and I already wish that it could print even bigger sizes. Maybe one day I will buy 24 inch wide printer (already dreaming of PROGRAF iPF6400) but currently cannot justify the cost since I am only printing for me and friends and do not charge for prints. From some professional print house reviews of this printer it seems more economical but only when large volumes are printed. It can do however canvas and banners so I will keep on dreaming. Bottom line, if you are looking for making great large format prints for your own use or even for sale, go and buy this printer. You will not be disappointed. If you are looking for a cheap way to print volumes of 4x6 prints at a good quality, this printer running cost might be too much for you, so go ahead and find something in dye based printers in a smaller format. You will save money in the long term. This is pretty much it. I hope you find this review useful.

Show more

Comment

I LIKE this printer, but I cannot say I love it. I bought the Canon Pixma Pro-10 printer about 4 years ago. What I liked: > Great, professional looking prints > Was able to print onto a variety of surfaces (Photo paper of any type; Cardstock; I was even able to print onto sheets from a canvas pad I bought at the art store with no problems and it looked fabulous) > Wireless connectivity (at first; then came an update see below) What I did not like: > Eats ink like the Cookie Monster eats cookies > Printhead is virtually impossible to unclog once it clogs (my bad- if you choose this printer make sure it is used frequently or that you at least run a printhead cleaning once a week whether you intend to use it or not- lesson learned) > Replacement printhead, thougth a piece of cake to replace, is difficult, at best, to find. > Replacement printhead is EXPENSIVE to replace (refer back 2 bullets above) > Not designed for duplex printing > After Canon updated the driver for this printer, I suddenly had connectivity problems I never had prior to the update. I reinstalled the old driver and opted not to update when prompted, and poof! Connectivity problems were gone. Obviously an issue with the update- admittedly, it may have had something to do with the fact that I was still using a Windows 7 machine at the time, but I had neither the time nor the patience to take it up with Canon. In short, for the money its a pretty good printer but you will be replacing the ink quite a bit. If you take good care of this printer and use it frequently, and not neglect it- it should give you many years of good service. For me, I was able to do a lot of good work with it- but, for now, its a doorstop until I can find and afford a replacement printhead (Helpful Hint: Amazon does not sell them). Knowing what I know now, I would shop around just a little more before settling on this one.

Show more

Comment

This photo printer is by far the best Ive ever owned. Canon has always been known for high quality products and this is no different. I was deliberating between the PRO-1 and the PRO-10. Although I do some black and white photography, I did not feel it was enough to warrant the decision to choose a PRO-1. I own a Canon PIXMA MP990. If someone says there is no difference, print out a black and white photo on another brand of photo printer, then print the SAME photo on any Canon PIXMA printer that utilizes a gray ink tank. It will not take long to see the difference. IF YOU ARE NOT A PATIENT person, you may not want this printer. Although the quality is second to none, it took me about 6 and a half minutes to print a high-res 13 by 19 color photo. I can EASILY live with that, considering the appearance of the print. As far as ink usage, I set up the printer, printed 11 at 13 by 19 size color prints, 8 Avery half fold cards, 6 of 8.5 by 11 photos, and several 4 by 6 prints and my 10 ink tanks are still showing all full. I imagine that will soon change, but Im entirely satisfied. I would highly recommend this printer.

Show more

Comment

This printer is amazing. I got mine at a real low price. It was new and still in the original packaging but someone removed the AMEX rebate and returned it. So I got it for less than a third off. What a deal! The printer works like a dream. I use it for art prints that I create and I couldnt be happier. Nor could my clients. I figured the cost to be about $5.50 per 13" x 19" print which is about 25 cents different from the lab. So who could ask for more. I have to warn you though. Stick to the canon inks. Worth the cost. The cheaper ones give bad results and leak. Luckily none leaked into my machine( I can only imagine the damage that could do) My only regret is that I cant go to an even larger format. Just think what producing 24 x 36" would be like with such vivid colors and accurate copy of what is on my computer screen. Another plus is that it is virtually silent.

Show more

Comment

As an artist, this is one of the best investments I have ever made. I can make giclee quality prints from home for a fraction of the price! No need to deal with third party printers and a ton of stock laying around the house. I can print to order with ease! Not only that - but Im able to print on vinyl, sticker paper, etc. I highly recommend this machine to any artist I know! One word of advice - do *not* use the "My Image Garden" software that comes with the printer. At the beginning all of my prints were off center and I could not figure out what was wrong. I finally printed directly from photoshop and that solved my problem! :)

Show more

Comment

This printer is very good. I have never owned a pigment based printer before, nor have I ever owned a printer with more than four inks. The quality of the prints is plainly superior to that of those from a typical inkjet printer, and I cannot find anything to indicate that the prints are inferior to what you might get from a lab, provided of course that you know what you are doing well enough to have correctly colored images of sufficient resolution. I do have one complaint, which is what prompted the loss of the star. This printer is huge. It is not something I want sitting on my desk, so I put it on its own shelf. This shouldnt be an issue, since the printer is wireless and can connect to wifi. My complaint is that the wireless printing is poorly executed. When you print a large photo, say a 13x19, the data is streamed to the printer, and the printer prints as it receives the data. If the wireless connection is not strong, then the print will sometimes fail in the middle leaving you with a half-printed (or worse, a 90% printed) photo, which is a pretty significant waste of ink, paper, and time. Canon could fix this by having the printer buffer the entire page before it even begins printing so that even if the connection is lost, the print continues. There may be technical limitations that prevent this, imposed by printer protocols or something, but I dont think there are. There are some obvious solutions that I can use to fix the issue. I can move the router closer to the room with the printer. I can move the printer closer to the room with the router. I can print via the Firewire cable (which is what I do). I can install a signal booster to enhance the reception. I should not have to do any of those things though. The printer is in a spot where all of my other devices have acceptable signal, so the printer should as well.

Show more

Comment

The print quality deserves 5 stars. The only reason I only give it 4 stars is the first printer I received did not work and the paper feed is very tricky. It regularly takes 4 or more attempts to get this printer to accept a sheet of paper, sometimes 10 or more attempts. Granted this was with Moab Sommerset Enhanced Velvet 11 X 17 PAPER which is a bit thick but not for fine art paper which this printer should handle. I thought the documentation on how to load the paper was weak and thought I was probably doing something wrong so I called Canon Tech Support and they walked me through the paper loading process which was exactly what Id been doing. They did not seem to think it all that unusual to have to make multiple attempts to load a sheet of paper. So if you are patient this printer delivers beautiful results. If you tend toward impatience this may not be the printer for you. As I write this I am awaiting delivery of ink which when it arrives I will resume printing on another type of Moab paper. If it was the paper Ill post a follow up here. Update 8/18/18 A slightly lighter weight paper such as Moab Lasal Matt photo paper made all the difference in the paper handling, problem solved

Show more

Comment

This is a great printer IF you use it every day, all day. Out of the box color accuracy is fantastic and for most purposes you can let the driver do the default color calibration. So why only 2 starts? This piece of junk will cost you over $10 every time you turn it on. It eats a color cartridge worth of ink by only doing the turn-on ceremony that takes something like 5 minutes of mechanical stuff without doing anything useful. I only print on it occasionally. An it asks for a new cartridge, or even two every time that I use it. And thats with printing only 1-10 pages, usually with not very high coverage, at a time. This is my third wide format printer in the last 15years. You can have mine for free if you want.

Show more

Comment

As with all Canon products, the hardware is great but the software and manuals are sub-par. The supplied software is un-usable as was the case with the Mark III scanner I purchased as well. To solve issues you have to do a Google search and use trial and error. Once you get through the frustration of dealing with all the technical issues the printer does produce stunning results. Could never get WIFI connectivity to work so just used a USB 2.0 connection and set up my iMac as a print server to put the PIXMA PRO-10 on the network. Software CD supplied is really old and was not compatible with MacOS 10.13. Had to download the latest driver from the web. Dont install the Canon software applications - its a waste of disk space. I give it a 3 star for network connectivity and a 5 star for printer performance. I give it a 0 or 1 star for software and manuals.

Show more