Canon - imagePROGRAF PRO-1100

Exactly as mentioned above; - CP1500 is perfect for 10x15 prints and it is cheap to run. approx 0.33€/print - G550 or G650 are a great option if you don’t want to deal with any cartridge printers as they both work work bottled ink - PRO-1100 seems overkill in this scenario, it prints up to A2 - PRO-200S or PRO-310 are better option as they give you more control over your prints with more colors to work with. Or if you find a PRO-300 on the cheap. Go for that. They are both cartridge printers. The cost of running is higher the a G650 but you do get better color reproduction. I hope this helps!

If you are selling prints you for sure want the 1100. It makes incredibly stunning prints that will last.

Get the lawyer a laser printer. For your photography, a dedicated A3+ photo printer is a beautiful thing. I used a Canon Pro-100 dye based printer for years. Great output. I think the pro-200 is its successor. Recently I jumped to the Pro-1100 17” pigment based printer. Excellent again plus even better, to my eye, on matte and art papers with the pigment inks. The Pro-300 also uses pigment inks but is cheaper being a 13” model.

I have an Epson SP900 that can take 17" rolls but the head clogs and clogs. Id never recommend an Epson EVER. Canons Pro-1000 or newer Pro-1100 are awesome but I don't think you can use a roll. I have a friend that got a used Pro-2000 for about $1000 and he loves it.

Normally one of the 5/6-ink Canon PIXMAs would be my recommendation for high quality home photo printing, using only genuine Canon ink and high quality photo paper. Canon's own photo paper is excellent and works superbly with their ink, as you'd expect, but some people choose to go with a high end third party brand photo paper instead (Canon even sell some high end third party photo paper alongside their own). With a larger budget, one of Canon's PRO-series machines would be the next step up. The PIXMA PRO-200S is the prosumer/enthusiast model with 8 dye inks. The imagePROGRAF PRO-310 is the professional photographer's A3 machine with 10 pigment inks. The imagePROGRAF PRO-1100 is the professional photographer's A2 machine with 12 pigment inks. There are also large format imagePROGRAF PRO-series roll-fed machines from 24" to 60" width, but those would be beyond your budget and a long way beyond what you describe. You really need good pixels, and a lot of them, to get the best results printing on A3 or A2. I'm sure those machines would do excellent work with a high res photo from an exceptionally good phone, but they really need images from a Canon EOS camera (or a high spec Canon PowerShot), or something equally good, to get the best out of them and perform to their full potential. Now, in all honesty, a Canon PIXMA G500/600-series (A4), TS8700/8800-series (A4) or TS9500-series (A3) can do a superb job with a high quality image. Those are the 5/6-ink machines 1 step below the PRO-200S. I've got a Canon EOS camera and PIXMA TS9550, and the prints I get on A4 and A3 Canon photo paper are excellent. That could be all you need. Sure, the prints I would get from my EOS on a PRO-series would be a step closer to perfection, but I love what my PIXMA can do with a good image on good photo paper, and it was relatively affordable. If you don't already have a good enthusiast/pro level camera, I would spend that $1,500 on one of the Canon PIXMAs a step below the PRO machines and the remainder on a PowerShot or EOS R50/R10 starter kit (don't get the R100, it is still a good camera, but a generation behind on the image processor and kinda the no-frills model to entice people into the EOS ecosystem).

If the ability to print larger than A3 posters and banners appeals, have a look at the Canon imagePROGRAF TC-21/TC-21M. It's a 24" roll machine, so can do A1 & A2 or up to 24"-wide banners from the roll, and can additionally handle A3, A4, A5, A6 cut sheets. If you don't want to go as big as 24", have a look at the imagePROGRAF PRO-310 (A3) and PRO-1100 (A2) professional photo printers, or the PIXMA PRO-200S (A3) if you need to bring the price down. Paper weight is a complicated thing, as it's really the stiffness and thickness which matters. All of Canon's PIXMA printers will handle Canon's own photo paper up to 300 gsm, and their PRO-series photo printers will do slightly heavier stuff. Check the spec sheets for each model to get the specifics of what they say it can handle. The spec sheets tell you the maximum paper thickness that the machines will handle, which can be more important than the paper weight. In terms of photo paper quality, you might not really need to go above 300 gsm for business marketing. That gets you all the way up to Canon PT-101 Pro Platinum or LU-101 Luster paper from their professional grade papers. Their PRO-series machines will give you professional photo studio quality prints on their pro paper.

Lots of artists use epson or canon printers to make their own prints. Not only is it higher quality than most labs, it is massively cheaper if you print on fine art papers. It’s still less expensive than photo papers (light sensitive) but the benefit is less. Would recommend epson p900 or canon pro 1100. They are a little more than 1k but worth it

I have the Canon Pro 1100. Excellent printer but does go through ink - certainly at the start. It is a workhorse....many printing shops use it for their intermediate size prints.

yes. perfect for that. the consumables are quite well known. there are sites that will give you approximate costs of the ink and paper per print. for a 10x15 I would use 13x19 paper and situate the print in the centre. the canon software is quite good for this. I typically print 8x10 and will charge about $20-25 per print of my photos. this won't get me rich but it will more than cover the cost of print and the depreciation on the printer.

Canon Pro-1100 that replaced my Pro-300. Eye-watering cost, but it's been worth it so far. 17x22 are noticeably larger than 13x19 on a wall (even though it's only a few inches in each direction) and bigger ink tanks means I spend a lot less time changing them out, which was driving me nuts with the Pro-300.