Earlier this month I bought a new Epson 3880 17” printer. There is a $300 mail-in rebate and B&H has free shipping, so a net price of $849. The order also included Epson’s Exhibition Fiber 22x17, Exhibition Fiber 11x8.5 and Premium Photo Glossy 8x10; so another $200 in papers. During the last week I have printed ALOT. Just about every table and countertop in the house has prints strewn about. I have been comparing prints from most of my cameras used during the past seven years. This is the first time I have been able to print 17x22 ‘at will’ and compare anything and everything.

This exercise is to appease my curiosity. The results are anecdotal at best because there are no controls or variable isolation. I chose my favorite shots and other pictures which had a strong medium format feel when viewed on-screen. These pictures came from the Canon 1Ds, Canon 1Ds Mark II, Canon 1Ds Mark III, Leica M8, Leica M9, Phase One P25 (Mamiya AFD Mount) and the Mamiya ZD. The 9 pictures on this page were some of samples used. All the pictures were taken at the camera’s respective base ISO. The judge’s panel was the wife and yours truly. In extended viewing process of a whopping 3 or 4 minutes, she gravitated towards a couple images.

The first image was a black and white (the train bridge leading into Dallas). Normally when I process in B&W, she complains. For web content, she prefers color. I try to persuade her that the image is “stronger” in black & white. She looks at me blankly as if I laid a huge fart and quips, “well, I think color would look better.” So, I am truly surprised she picked a black & white image. Next up was the portrait in Maui on the rocks. That was a lucky shot because the light was pretty poor with overcast skies, but the sun popped out for 5 minutes - followed by rain. As the saying goes, better to be lucky than good.

Long story-short, the two prints (out of ~70) she gravitated towards were taken with the 1Ds3 and Zeiss 100mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE. Interestingly, nothing from the medium format or Leica group got her kudos. There are plenty of good pictures from the Leica M8 and M9 that she likes, but they were not stand-outs. This is a skewed analysis because trying to separate image quality vs content quality is difficult at best. Content wins every time. I think some of her favorites won based on content. My conclusions were (based on MANY more hours of staring & comparing):

1. •When printing on glossy paper, everything looks similar. Color richness, contrast, depth, detail - it all looks very similar to my eyes. When viewing on a 30” monitor the camera / file quality differences can be obvious. On screen viewing is brutal, whereas printing hides noise and clipped highlights tend to look better. Just my 2-cents.
   

2. •When printing at 22x17 and assuming the file is around 240 DPI, the results from each camera are very similar. It was disheartening to see images with a strong on-screen medium format look dissipate into a 2D feel when printed. Some of these pictures jump off the screen (to me eyes), but in print that 3D pop gets lost. Maybe I need to print bigger and stand back further....?...
   

3. •I know the Phase One P25 has the cleanest shadows and deepest colors, but in print the Canon 1Ds Mark III looks every bit as good. If somebody took the same picture with the P25 and 1Ds3, edited them similarly and printed - I doubt I could tell the difference. Maybe the Epson 3880 is not capable of reproducing all the P25‘s potential, but it is a well regarded printer.
   

Based on this “study” and if being 100% honest, the Canon 1Ds Mark III is all I need - especially if 17x22 is the maximum print size. Such pragmatic thinking is not my strong suit and I still have gear-lust for a MF + RF combo - a Leica M10 with Live View and a Phase One IQ160 is the golden ring. I do wonder if chasing the “medium format look” remains a valid objective since the “look” really is not materializing in the prints - definitely confused about that. Despite this “test” proving to me that I do not need medium format, in some ways the want has increased because I would like to print 17x22’s at 360 DPI. Additionally, atheistically I prefer the 4:3 ratio and find it easier to work with when printing and framing.

The Epson 3880 is doing a wonderful job. In terms of detail and definition, the Zeiss ZE lenses do seem to have an advantage. The Leica M9 images with the 50 Lux ASPH and Canon 100/2 M39 (LTM lens) do very well too. I suppose medium format would win if I were printing larger than 17x22. My medium format portfolio is small compared to the Canon / Leica pictures, so medium format did not have fair representation in this ad-hoc test. If I manage to find a Phase One set-up at the right price, comparing some side-by-side prints of the same scene will be an interesting follow-up.