Not to worry if the printer actually turns out to be reasonably economical for most endusers, but something to really be concerned with if one only expects to be a low print volume user. 3ml ink waste per print is legitimate although I can't confirm or deny that claim yet, but I do know that Canon does rely on other stealth cleaning cycles for its other pigment printers and that the enduser's frequency of usage unwittingly plays a big role in how much ink hits the paper and how much goes down the waste tank. I plan on studying the Pro-1000 over the next year and to track "total cost of ownership" amortized on an equivalent per print basis. Canon does use "stealth" cleaning cycles to keep its pigment printers running "clog-free", but the enduser usage patterns play a huge role in just how much and how often such cleanings occur. At 45 days of non use, for example, the Pro-1 will auto initiate a "deep cleaning cycle", and according to weighing studies I performed, that deep clean cycle wastes nearly 50 ml of ink down the waste tank. The other disconcerting issue is that the clock timer induced cleaning cycle gets more aggressive as the machine goes unused for longer stretches of time. The nozzle check uses far less ink than a timer-induced cleaning cycle, and I just put in very cheapest plain paper to perform that step. The work around is to run a nozzle check pattern every two day (48 hours or so) such that it resets the clock. With the prosumer Pro-1 model, the clock timer kicks in at about 60 hours of non use, and several ml of ink then gets used to "preclean" the head before it initiates the next print. With my iPF8300, I need to run a simple nozzle check every 3-4 days to prevent a cleaning cycle that would otherwise auto complete right before the first print starts after a longer period of non use. On the other hand, I also have a Canon ipf8300 and a Canon Pro-1 in house, and both machines do use simple clock timer cycles to run a cleaning cycle if the printer has not been used for a specific period of time. Definitely not the right time to run any pre-emptive cleaning. It also doesn't make much sense because head clogging issues would be at their very lowest probability right after a successful print is made. even in the printer's generous print log info, to reviewers or endusers. I also read that statement somewhere as well, but like you I'm somewhat skeptical, and Canon would be highly unlikely to divulge that information.
0 kommentar(er)
