The printer that just worked (and other fairytales)

I am impressed with the Canon TC-21 A1 printer. Don't get me wrong.

But it seems that Canon doing something very stupid! I have had this with many printers before.

It is telling the printer the type of paper!

Please make it simple!

Firstly there seems to be no standard such as what satin or coated actually means, or even terms like heavy/light weight.

But it does seem the printer considers the paper type (and notably the weight, and hence thickness) in deciding when the roll ends, and somehow I must have had it wrong as it ended several metres before it really did with no option to say just bloody print - I know what I am doing.

But there is one standard and that is gsm (grams per square metre), and the paper is marked with it, so why not make the paper settings on the printer also show the gsm - that way I stand some chance. Another idea may be to allow me to set the length of the roll, as that is also printed on it - or at least show the lengths for each option.

Doing the right thing

So, it is a Canon printer, I'll do the right thing and use Canon ink, and Canon rolls of paper, what could go wrong.

This is the paper.

You can see it is Canon, and is 130 gsm, 610mm wide, and 30m long, and described as "Premium Paper FSC". The FCS is just a certificate not related to type of paper though.

I have some options.

There are many more options, but they get quite specific. The only one marked "Premium" (well "Prem") looks like 80gsm perhaps. So not that. I am assuming "Coated Paper" for now, but I really have no clue at all. The options are not clear and none use the exact wording on the roll of paper itself or state 130gsm.

If you sell a printer and it has a list of paper types, and you sell paper and they have specific names for each type, why the hell not use the same terms/names in both places, please, Canon!

Quality product?

But it gets worse. The roll has to be installed with the paper pushed properly to the right hand end stop that fits in the core or the roll. It checks this (good) and even has little diagrams showing you how to fit, and lock the end stop in the core.

Except...

The core sticks out, so no way to push the end stop up to the paper edge. I tried several times, and no joy.

Only fix was a sharp knife, and finally it works.

This is official Canon paper for the printer and does not work in the printer. Really not that impressed.

Reseller?

The reseller has taken this seriously, and has pointed me to some reference information that may help.

Canon PRO-1000 vs CT-21

I have had a Canon PRO-1000 for some time, it is an amazing printer. It is a must for someone producing professional photographic image prints. I cannot stress how good quality it is.

But I have just replaced with a Canon CT-21. So I felt it's worth explaining why, and what difference it makes.

Do I need a photo printer?

The first point is whether I need a photo printer. It is my only colour printer, and I do print photos for the family that get framed and go on walls, and so on. But I print stuff like a menu with a colour logo on it, etc, which seems overkill to use a PRO-1000.

Basically, I probably do not need a professional photo printer, really. It is just my usual overkill.

What is my use now?

Given the ability to print up to A2, I have actually been using it for posters for the pub. They are stunning.

Is A2 big enough?

The catch is, posters at a pub, may want more, like A1. So I decided to get the TC-21, which is an A1 poster printer that takes roll paper feed. If someone accidentally orders A0 clip frames at the pub, I may be in trouble.

What of TM-255?

I considered the TM-255 - it uses 5 inks, not 4, but has a base, and is just so big. It looks great, but I simply did not have space. The TC-21 fits on my bench. The ™-255 is also high volume and stupidly quick, but the TC-21 is not a problem for what I need in terms of print speed.

Key points in favour of the PRO-1000

• The photo print quality is just amazing, cannot be faulted.
• It does edge to edge printing on most paper sizes (oddly not A5), which is very cool. Even A2.

Key points in favour of TC-21

• It does A1+. Indeed, it will do 610mm wide and 18m long if you want!!!
• It does roll paper feed (which I am using for A1+ or A2+), but it can take narrower paper roll.
• It does sheet feed (no need to take out rolls feed, just manual sheet feed via top loader), all the way down to A6. Very handy.
• Easy colour refill - the PRO-1000 is easy, but this is only 4 inks.

Some downsides for PRO-1000

• It uses 12 inks, this is a feature in terms of quality but a pain in terms of costs and hassle with ink. It also gets through "maintenance kits" which also cost.
• If you do not use for a while, weeks, it will waste a lot of ink and take ages to start up. But it will then print perfectly. I don't know if the TC-21 does this.

Some downsides of the TC-21

• It is bigger, check dimensions, but wider by quite a bit. Well, obviously it has to be.
• It does not do edge to edge well - it can get very close on roll feed, maybe 1mm each side, and cut with no margin top/bottom. But not at all on sheet feed. This is perhaps its main lack of feature.
• It is only CMYK not 12 inks, but the photo printing is still good, and good enough by far for some family photos.

I do not know running costs yet, but the results are pretty good.

New printer (Canon PRO-1000)

I have had, and used, many printers over time (for paper, not 3D).

Just off the top of my head :-

• Simple line of pins impact dot matrix through ribbon - classic. I had a few of these.
• Single "pin" with rotating roller behind paper to do dot matrix through ribbon - slow - prints one dot at a time moving up through the character, then the blade shaped head moves right to do next pixel one dot at a time.
• Band printers - I did not own one, but used one - has all the letters on a band, and it is fascinating watching the line form as each letter is printed when it is over the right space, printing many in the line at a time, so the line of text sort of forms in seemingly random order in front of your eyes.
• Daisy wheel, impact print through ribbon, but fun doing some graphics with a lot of full stops.
• A spark based printer, single wire high drags at high speed across the paper for each row burning off a silvered surface of the paper, dot matrix - creates a black on silver text.
• A spark jet printer, with a carbon rod in a glass tube making a spark to the paper and carrying carbon deposited on the page. Single glass tube moves at high speed back and forth over the paper. Like printing with pencil. I did my degree dissertation on that.
• A variety of thermal printers on thermal paper - head the width of paper. Fades rather easily.
• A variety of thermal transfer printers, transfer from film to normal paper, head the width of paper.
• A variety of thermal transfer multi-colour ribbon printers for photo printing.
• The plastic card printer we use at work, thermal transfer. Ive used two kinds of such printers.
• Normal A4 laser printers, postscript
• A3 laser printer, colour
• Ink jet printer
• Bubble jet printer
• Oh, and pen plotters

Wow, I have had a lot of printers. I suspect I have missed some out even.

Actually, I left out that I have used manual, movable lead type printing machines and done typesetting using actual fonts of lead type characters. Genuine upper and lower "cases". That was a long time ago. I must be old.

The printer I have used for a long time is a wax based printer - originally Tektronix, but now bought by Xerox. I like them as they are not as messy as using toner and do solid colours really well. You just drop in these wax blocks to load the ink, neat and tidy. They are OK (ish) for photo print, but for colour letterheads (which is why we got them originally) they are really nice. I even print red wax seals to use with an embossing seal, and well, it was actually wax.

The office moved on to other laser printers some time ago, and my printer here finally started playing up (sheet feeder issues), so I have decided it is time for a new printer, and I thought it would be nice to get an ink jet type printer, but why not get one that can do photos...

What I eventually got was a Canon PRO-1000. It can have a stack of A4 plain paper for the normal use cases, but can also take a variety of sizes up to A2, and do impressive high resolution professional quality photo prints, edge to edge, on photo paper. It does pretty good photos even on plain paper.

So, yes, it will be used for simple A4 prints most of the time. These days I print quite low volumes, and can alway use printers at work for printing something with a lot of pages. It also has separately replaceable ink cartridges, which I prefer. However, there have been occasions where we do want to print bigger than A4, mainly for circuit drawings, etc.

But yes, I can print really nice photographs now. This is printing an A2 map on plain paper.

I did consider getting the wider models, they can do roll based prints up to A0, or even bigger. You can print proper posters for adverts and the like. But no way it would fit in the man-cave sensibly. I was also not sure if it would do the simple A4 plain paper as easily. The PRO-1000 seems a good compromise. The print quality really is rather impressive and having the option of large prints is nice.

Canon EOS-R

For background I have used most of EOS 1D MkII, EOS 1Ds MkII, EOS 1D MkIII, EOS 1Ds MkIII, EOS 1DX, EOS 1DX MkII, belonging to us and friends. The ones we have get used in the business, for everything from coverage of sports events we are sponsoring, to photographs of products for packaging and web sites. We do offer photographic service even, but I am not really a professional photographer myself. I do, however, have some experience using Canon high end cameras.

In most cases I also had the WiFI adaptor and a GPS adaptor. The latest 1DXMkII has GPS built in, and the separate WiFI adaptor does 5GHz as well. The package works well, we take product shots and they instantly FTP to the file server where we can view then and use them.

I now have an EOS-R. I knew it was a slight backwards step. It is Canon's new full frame mirrorless camera and a few features are not quite as good as the 1DXMkII, but it has some nice things like built in WiFi and higher resolution sensor.

I don't intend to do a review of the optical / photographic features. There are many such reviews by those far more qualified than I to explain and review. In summary, the EOS-R is Canon's new full frame (30Mpix) mirrorless high end camera, with a new "RF" mount but with EF adaptor, which works nicely. It is small and light compared to 1DX, but has an optional battery clip which I like (others may disagree) which takes two batteries (battery life being one clear area it lacks compared to the 1DX). It is slower to start up, which is a tad annoying.

What I want to do is address the network side. Being something of a network engineer and having coded network stacks from scratch, I like to think I am a bit of an expert in this area. However, I 100% accept that some of the issues I have had may be user error. I'll update this blog where that is the case, but with the caveat that as someone with experience of previous high end Canon cameras, user error really should not be happening, if designed well.

1. Bad: No IPv6 (as far as I can see). When Canon started designing this camera, the IPv6 specs had been around for a couple of decades and the current version of Internet Protocol is v6. I could rant for ages on this, but I'll gloss over for now - for most things we can cope using just IPv4.

2. Good: Built in WiFi. Nice to have, and something I have always had to pay for as an extra adaptor before.

3. Bad: Seems to only be 2.4GHz WiFi. But to be fair they sell a separate WiFi adaptor too, which I really hope is 5GHz, so someone wanting faster WiFi can take that option. Fair enough I guess, but I doubt they saved a lot making it only 2.4GHz these days.

4. Bad: No built in GPS. I am sort of in two minds over this. I like GPS. I had a separate GPS adaptor on much older models, and the 1DXMkII built in GPS was nice. However, Canon have decided they can link to your mobile phone for location instead. I cannot work out if this is an annoying bodge or a cunning technical solution yet. I do, indeed, normally have my phone, and it knows where I am. I hope it will do it over Bluetooth as otherwise I have to faff with changing WiFi on my phone to use camera as AP or some such which I don't want to do.

5. Bad: Broken bluetooth. I have no idea at this stage if this is just my camera or generally, but any attempt to pair a bluetooth device does not get as far as a list from which to pick - it crashes out with Error 70 (a shooting problem?!?).

6. Bad: Very unhelpful error messages. I decided to try the cloud service thing. I am not going to use it as it means all photos go to Canon, sorry. But I did test it. Initially I was using the wrong WiFi SSID (partly because it does not show UTF8 SSIDs and partly as it does not show 5GHz only SSIDs) which meant it hit a wifi with an http intercept and splash screen. The error was that I had to set the camera data and time! This is so unhelpful as (a) you have internet, set it yourself FFS, and (b) if you have connection problems over internet say so, don't invent an unrelated error! (c) I had set the date and time, to within a fraction of a second.

7. Bad: No direct Ethernet, but maybe not the end of the world given it has built in WiFi.

8. Bad: It will not do FTP. This is not Canon deciding that people do not want FTP because it is old (which is an issue, I agree), as they will do FTP if you buy a second WiFi adaptor. The firmware clearly has the FTP capability and you can even select which images to transfer via FTP in the menus, but not actually set up FTP at all. For some inexplicable reason, even on this expensive camera, Canon have decided to cripple the software to not do FTP over the built in WiFi, and I cannot see any sensible reason for this massive backwards step. It almost makes me want to send it back for this alone. After all, most other models I have used will do FTP over Ethernet - you only need the extra WiFi adapter to, err, do WiFi. They don't cripple the protocols you have without it.

9. Bad: I simply cannot get the file transfer to a Mac to work at all. I have tried more than one Mac. I have even tried with camera setting up an SSID and Mac connecting to it. I have tried following the exact steps as explained by Canon on twitter only to find the app does not have a "Pairing over WiFi" button as shown in the manual. Even where I have managed to get a pairing over WiFi option though different routes, nothing shows on Mac or Camera. The WiFi does work (I can ping the camera, and even transfer to my iPhone over WiFi). This was after having to pretend I had High Sierra not Mojave (as advised by Canon). I am not keen on a call with their support, but may have to. Whilst this really is not as good as simply doing FTP, it may allow me to bodge something together to make it work overall, but I bet it will only work when on same WiFi as my Mac and not (as with FTP) from anywhere on the Internet.

10. Bad: I hope this is user error. I cannot seem to find any way to make the screen and view finder work as a normal SLR. It has a manual mode to always be screen or always be view finder, or auto to switch to view finder when you move your eye to it. What I cannot find is view finder when my eye is there, and menus / display photos / preview of shot taken on screen but NOT live shooting on screen. Why? Well (a) I am used to an SLR not live shooting, and (b) the live shooting is touch screen focus (nice when you want it) but bad when you touch with your nose, etc, (c) its uses power showing a live screen for ages when I don't need it. I'd like that option and a simple button to turn on live shooting on main screen when I want it and not all the time.

I'll update with more when I have chatted more to Canon on this.

Update1: Went through in great detail, with pictures (so as to be helpful) with Canon on twitter and they have no clue on the bluetooth issue! They have gone off to check with technical support.

Update2: Using camera as a WiFi AP, I managed to "pair" over WiFi to the EOS Utility, and then it worked via normal AP, but sort of only once and then freezes on the Mac so badly I end up rebooting. It does work in the mean time, but no way I am rebooting every time I want to transfer files. And that still does not give the auto file transfer to Mac as that is a different app! As I said in the comments, just one, standards based, protocol for sending images as taken over IP - that is all I want, whether FTP, SFTP, whatever, even https posts FFS. Anything that does not mean special proprietary code on my computer that Canon clearly struggle to make usable or stable.

Update3: Just to clarify, I can connect to iPhone, using normal WiFi AP, with its normal IP addresses (IPv4), and does not even have to be same SSID, just same LAN. So I can grab images to iPhone, remote shoot, and so on. That is moderately slick. So that is some progress. Talking to my Mac is still a struggle. Bluetooth is a total bust still.

Update4: I reproduced the stupid "set date/time" error by simply redirecting the https that is used for the cloud services to something without the right certificate. I have yet to check if a self signed or faked CA would work. What a stupid error to report though, really!

Update5: I tried again, resetting everything on the camera and rebooting the Mac and re-downloading the apps from canon. Somehow, this time, the Image Transfer Utility was able to "pair" with the camera. In face the mac is not even on the same SSID (but is on same LAN). And before you ask, the AP is not set with any broadcast filtering set up. So I do now have auto transfer (when here) to my Mac, so I'll have to code some magic to send to my photo site.

Update6: New stupid. Yes the auto file transfer to my Mac works, but not when I take a picture, no. It happens later, if I turn camera off, and later turn on again, then it suddenly catches up all unsent pictures at that point. WTF - what the hell is the matter with Canon. These are the people that, on the 1DX, with FTP, will actually connect and login on pressing focus and hold the TCP connection open so that the file transfer happens the instant you press the shutter.

Update7: Mirrorless it going to be hard to get used to - I pick up camera and hold view finder to my eye, and blackness initially - I even have to press something to see am image - that is so strange. Yes, it wakes up and I can then see something, but that is just weird, and I guess a feature of mirrorless.

Update8: Apparently the "Auto send images to computer" is designed like that, such that to to "auto send" the images you have just taken you have to "manually" turn the camera off and back on a gain. What the hell is wrong with Canon?

Update9: Apparently it can transfer to computer as you shoot, but only as "remote shooting", but that is misleading as in remote shooting mode you can shoot using camera. But to get to that is multiple menus and so on to get to it. Also, having got to the menu once, I cannot again - the camera says it is connect or not, but the EOS utility just offers pairing over wifi and does not list the camera now. Buggy as hell. There seems no way to just pick up the camera, take pictures, and have them transfer automatically as taken if you are on the local WiFi - it is hassle whatever you do with this camera. Nightmare. Canon used to be good, I thought, anyway.

Conclusion - going back for refund.

P.S. It is probably worth adding a few points. There are many ways to use a camera. I choose to have images stored on a server where they are backed up, and sorted in to albums and so on. The server links to geo-tagging as well, and presents images in different sizes or full size. For some, storing only on a local computer most of the time would be fine. For me, the server is in a data centre not next to me, so, for example, we have a shooting table at work for product shots but no computer is there, we take shots knowing they are on the server and use that later. So that means the EOS remote shooting would not work as you have to select on camera and then on Mac, so need the Mac there next to camera. That seems not to work for me over WiFi, but I know it does work over USB and if the Mac was there I'd use USB instead of WiFi to be honest. The way of working I have may be a minority - it is where I can simply pick up the camera and press the shutter and take a picture, and anywhere within the known WiFi we have in both offices and at my house I can be confident that, within seconds, even fractions of a second, the image is safely stored on the photo server where I can access it (even from my phone). Elsewhere I can connect to a local WiFi or even the hotspot on my phone, and it will transfer. If shooting away from these WiFI, it is a couple of buttons when I return to send all unsent images. This is fast, and easier than taking the card out, as that would mean then doing a file transfer from my Mac to the photo server which is a lot more manual that simply letting the camera do its thing. I am not fussed if not FTP, they have FTPS, and I'd be happy with any standards based file transfer, even just an https post to nominated URL would be great - please do that Canon - you basically do that to a fixed URL for your own Cloud system - just let me put my URL in instead. Canon used to support this way of working - heck they still do as FTP (and FTPS) is still a feature even on the EOS-R, but oddly, unlike other cameras where it was a standard feature even without having to buy the WiFi module, for the EOS-R you have to buy the WiFi module to use it, even though YOU ALREADY HAVE WIFI BUILT IN! It is also a big WiFi module (not like the little WTF-E8).

P.P.S. Wex photographic have been great, as always, and it is a bit of a shame that they had a faulty (bluetooth) unit.