Great prints but it is not for high volume every day use.
FX artist "inkboyt", Amazon
21 May 2012
Summary: I have had this printer for a few years now. I do fine art and illustration along with some photo work. This printer works like a charm in terms of beautiful prints: great colors and contrast, etc. (especially on good quality archival artist paper). That said, the 9500 is not for printing t-shirt transfer papers or anything else in high volume, nor is it for printing massive number of documents.
Summary: I could only give this printer 3 stars because it uses a lot of ink. It does produce very good quality prints, but it is slow. For the money, I would recommend this unit because of print quality. The installed color profiles work very well, so I don't see a need to produce your own. There are 2 different programs that come with the software disk. One program is for general printing and the other is for photographic.
Summary: If this printer was wireless I would have given it 5 stars. Print quality is as good or better than lab prints. Not the fastest, but sharpness and detail is amazing. I have been using 3rd party inks and running a custom profile so ink cost is not an issues. Color match is excellent. Very happy with the printer.
Summary: I have owned the Pro9500 for several years and, in general, I think it is an excellent printer. I have now bought the Mark II version and I will do a quick comparison as well as comment on the state of Canon's Pixma Pro support. Comparison: I can see no differences in prints made on the two printers. The Mark II has a "swing" gate where paper is feed in the top to prevent dirt going into the print mechanism; the older model does not have this piece.
Summary: The first thing you notice is the build quality. While the machine certainly isn't cheap, the fit and finish suggest a more expensive product. This is an upgrade from my Epson 2200, which I've had for many years. The Epson seems a bit flimsy by comparison. As everyone has said, the print quality is excellent. I especially like the depth of the blacks on my BW prints. As good as I used to get back in the old darkroom days.
Summary: I have not printed many photos with the printer as of yet. What I have printer so far look great. The printer is much slower than the HP Photosmart I'm replacing. Because of the size of the printer I could not put it on the computer desk and had to put on a table on the other side of the room. I needed to add a USB hub between the computer and printer to make the distance. Sure wish the printer had wireless and/or Ethernet like the HP printers.
Summary: My last *5!* printers were all Epson printers. I always purchased the top of the line models. I always felt they had the best overall image quality, which was of paramount importance to me. The last two I had had amazing image quality, but I got so tired of constantly wasting ink to clean the print heads so I could get a decent print.
Blown Away by Results - very slow 13x19's - B&W also great
10 December 2009
Summary: As a former owner of the Canon i9100 13x19 6 color process printer, I have to say that Canon has outdone themselves with this printer! The quality of the prints is AMAZING! My only complaint is that the printer is SLOOOOW. It took over an hour to print seven 13x19 pics. I am also VERY impressed with the black and white results. Unlike my Canon i9100, this printer doesn't seem to "tint" the grayscale printing with ANY color ink at all.