imagePROGRAF PRO-310

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 outdated af but the machine itself prints amazing.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.

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.

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.

Either the Canon 310 or the Epson P900 or similar models will meet your requirements really well. I don't think small exhibition quality printers are around anymore. You should research the wider margin issues that can happen with some Canon fine printers when you have certain "fine art" settings. Both of these printers have the required multiple grey tone carts for fine B&W output. I've owned printers from both brands happily, though I may like Epson a tiny bit more. I'm a professional artist who exhibits photographic prints at fine galleries across the US. I've been printing for 55 years in various contexts. The output from these printers is superb provided you develop the images with skill. Paper should compliment the image. Baryta paper is wonderful for B&W. Cold press cotton rag paper is excellent for images with texture. A glossy paper is great for high frequency images with lots of detail, illumination, reflective surfaces and so on. I stock 3-4 papers and make test prints to see what works. It's a money pit, but it's art. I'm sure you will get lots of enjoyment with any of these printers.

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

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.

I'd say same goes for canon pro 10/1, 300/1000, 310/1100... Have a pro 10s atm and it would be far better at this than at what i employ it ! (Vibrant illustrations on glossy paper xD)