Canon - imagePROGRAF PRO-310

For colour photos I find the Canon 300/310 to be outstanding and the ink price is relatively reasonable. 

If you're wanting to do high quality "archival" prints and selling them for hundreds of dollars then pigment ink printers are the way to go. For less than $1k your options are Canon Pro 310 or Epson P700. I prefer Canon. If you are making prints to sell for $20-$50 then dye ink printers like Epson Eco-Tank are great.

I just got the new canon prograf 310 and its BEAUTIFUL. interface is def. outdated af but the machine itself prints amazing. It was on sale for 799$ earlier but now at 890$. I wouldnt go with a 200S because it uses Dye instead of Pigment and for a little more you get waaaay nicer prints with pigment. https://preview.redd.it/2o1lawrfa1yf1.jpeg?width=4000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=50311f331074f0ab126912c1bee1b41a48909eb7 Left was my first print uncalibrated with no profile. Second is reprint with calibrated profile. Its just amazing as it looks. Heavyweight 68lb glossy premium epson paper.

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!

So I recently made this decision as well. I thought I was going to get the 1100. I wound up with the 310. Since I haven't actually sold anything yet and the prints the 310 creates are huge and the 1100 is about 50% more than the 310 when I bought it, I thought it made sense to get the 310. Save a bit of the foot print and money and see what it's like owning a real printer. I'm not entirely sure I'll do a great job maintaining it. So it's a slightly less risky way to approach printing my photos for sale. Also I'll say I just received my first batch of 13x39in paper and it's huge. Bigger is always better but it would be so rare for me to take advantage of going larger than that that I couldn't see myself doing it.

Well it will be expensive for sure (printer, inks, you have to print let's say every month or it will dry out) For many people ordering prints is better option But if you want your own photo printer then there are few good options - Canon pro-200 (dye based inks, but long lasting) - Canon pro-300 (pigment based inks so if paper survive the photo will be still good) - Canon pro-310 (upgrade to pro-300, more inks for better color reproduction) - Epson ET-8550 (it's eco tank so cheap inks and easier to use non-OEM inks - but not sure how long lasting OEM inks are, on the other hand have friends that are using non-OEM pigment inks and it works [well, needed some color calibration])

Laser printers do not produce photo quality prints. So lose that one. Pigment printers do not need a lot of maintenance. They do need to be used at least once weekly. I believe there is a utility that will automatically kick out a test print per your schedule. The Canon is a good one. But not economical for occasional use. Same for the Epson competitor models which you should check out too.

It sounds like you have a similar situation as me where the main value of owning the printer is the flexibility of your inventory. As others have suggested, the Canon PRO line is really excellent. For archival quality there's the PRO 310 for 13" pigment ink or the 1100 for 17". The reason Canons are my favorite - aside from great print quality - is the maintenance is very easy to do yourself. Print heads don't last forever, and with Canon it's an extremely fast and easy swap. Same for ink waste pads and maintenance chips. I'm on my second of both and it was incredibly easy compared to any other printer brand I've owned, especially the Epsons.

The PRO-310 is solid for art prints, definitely handles watercolor reproductions well with those 10 ink cartridges. Just make sure you're using good paper - something like Hahnemühle or Canson will make a huge difference compared to regular photo paper

I just got a Canon imageprograf pro 310. Great printer, does 13x19. I do find myself already regretting not getting the 1100 to go bigger and have more options for roll paper, but I'm financially irresponsible enough that I could end up just ordering a 2600 one day so *shrugs*

So first question would be are you working on a calibrated monitor and soft proofing your prints? If not, a calibrated printer is pointless. I just went through this and ended up going canon with an imageprograf pro 310. One of the main things I want to print is panoramas and there were far too many reviews of feed issues with larger and custom papers for me to buy an Epson. I do wish I had gone bigger, but the printer has been great so far. The software is great and my prints have come out fantastic!

With a calibrated monitor, soft proofing, and the profiles from Canon and Red River, my prints have mostly been bang on color wise without any messing around on my 310