So does the ET 8550 really compare to the KING? The CANON PRO 1000!

[@TheStlgg]

Had my Epson ET 8550 for three month and printed over 50 A4 Photos and the inks that came with the printer are still 75% full. every print so far has been beyond my expectations. Thank you to Keith and yourself for your time to create such unbiased content 👏

[@emcook1]

Jose I have printed around 1500 images on my ET8550. A combination of 4x6, 5x7, 8x10, 11x17 glossy, matte and lustre (mostly color but some BW as well) and have only been through one set of inks and about a 1/4 of another set. I love the print quality and the minimal cost associated with producing the images. BTW I have printed on some 10-15 year old paper with great results. I am not trying to defend the ET8550 vs any other printer. I don’t have any other printer and at this point do not see the need to spend the extra money for the cost of ink sets to produce prints that may last longer, however most likely as you and Keith have demonstrated will not look any better. FYI I do use Qimage One but very rarely find the need to use ICC profiles. I use an LG non 4K monitor not calibrated and my prints are almost identical to the color I see on the screen. In addition, I offer to print for some of my photography friends for free because it is so darn cheap to produce great quality prints. At this point my only potential concern is longevity of the printer itself given the amount of prints I am producing. Thanks Mike

[@ckuhn555]

Terrific printer, used 4 complete refills all colors for 8550. That's a lot of prints mostly 13x19. Anything larger or special papers (Ex watercolor paper) I use my Epson 7800.

[@andreasbelz2110]

Hi from Belgium. I love your videos. You help a lot of people to find the right choice. The technical best printer must not be the best printer for somebody

[@grumblewoof4721]

Thanks for that great comparison. Perhaps the difference is in accuracy and permanence of image. A professional who intends to produce and sell prints, in say limited editions, would require the best archival paper and best pigment inks and they would use the best printer for the job, the client or purchaser would expect it. If you have no intention for your prints to last 100+ years and the only person(s) likely to see the print is you, your family and friends on the living room wall, then you don't need a Pro 1000 (or Pro 1100) ... they would never be able to detect the difference, so you might as well save the money and get the ET 8550 or the Canon Pro 200. This will save you a lot in ink costs.. So the prints fade a bit ? Just print another copy and replace when they do.

[@cheo1949]

For sure. Huge difference when you include longevity. The point here what most user are usually concerned with is...how do my prints look. Specially firt timers.

[@kevins8575]

I'm guessing that qualitative observations (I won't say "test") would be better done by using epson's own premium paper on their machine. The printers and papers were likely optimized together.

[@mypapers3797]

New watcher here, José. What software are you using to print the photos?

[@spyrit35]

Great video Jose. It's also a shocker to compare the price of a set of bottles for the 8550 to a set of cartridges for the pro 1000 I imagine. I wonder if there are estimates for how many prints of a given size you get of each of the 2 sets, I imagine the 8550 would win there as well (as the initial purchase price).

[@robRobblah]

Interested in this metric - how many prints expected from each set of inks.

[@poni7373]

Thank you very much for sharing this. I do see a tint difference in the beige part in the sky. But that can maybe attributed to the fact that you did not create the icc profile for the Pro-1000. Both look great and if A3+ suffices, the Epson seems to be the way to go. But I would like to see the same printed on the Canon Pro-200 and Pro-300 and compared to the ET-8550

[@cheo1949]

Should not be too different from what the Pro1000 vs the ET8550 shows. The PRO-1000 is above the 200. The 200 is just an updated PRO10. The differences are basically Splitting Hairs.

[@LasstUnsSpielen]

Thank you for your expertise :)

[@ChicagoRob2]

I wonder if a custom Pro-1000 profile would make the results even closer.

[@cheo1949]

Possibly

[@FLMUSACanada]

I print for myself and a few others, we’re all professional shooters. I’ll take Canon every day over Epson because of paper transport, ease of use/set-up and tech support. If you want excellent prints from your images, cost of ink will be one of your lowest priorities.

[@Realtor_Rion]

nice profile

[@aznycts]

printer ink can cost more than gold when measured by the ounce. Wow. 😥 so I Stop Using Epson and Canon Printers for 2 Years Now . i got tired of The Inks papper cleaning etc. . about 2 years now i found out that printing My work at a professional photo lab will likely produce significantly better quality prints than even a high-end professional printer than i have have at home, mainly because labs use specialized, high-grade equipment, inks, and paper designed to achieve the most accurate color reproduction and detail possible, which is often beyond the capabilities of a consumer-grade printer, even a "professional" . Im aNot paranoid anymore 😆😆😆 .

[@ajansson3361]

When the printer is ready, and you look at the print and look the day after. You wil be amazed The difference when de inks have dried.😅 Print the same image again and look at the print from 24 ours ago. That is a shocker😂. I have de ET8550 and a Canon Pixma 550 for text and bw photo. Both are wonderfull printers

[@robRobblah]

Can you clarify a bit what the difference you mention is?