The main reasons for the MX925: working to 100% on the network, drivers were performant and the printed image significantly better.
Main reasons against the WF-3520: printer could find via scanning feature no PCs, unperformante drivers, average print image.
Detailed review:
The starting point:
A small office with 2 laptops (I7, 8 GB RAM, Win7 64bit), a desktop PC (I7, 8 GB, Win7 64 bit). On the web already problemlaus constantly: Synology NAS and a Canon MG 5250 printer.
The Request:
1) A DADF-capable printer (ie two-sided) with duplex print. Although the old Canon printer could print duplex, but not scan, causing a lot of manual work led.
2) Cost: max. 200 EUR
3) The old Canon printer must continue to function in the network (no driver conflicts).
4) It must be possible to drive over the network via the SCAN individual PCs from the printer to directly save the files there (cue digital document management)
Both printers fulfilled on paper this requirement -. Because of Epson is much cheaper and had better test results in various magazines, the Epson was acquired first.
The comparison of the printer in detail:
Processing hardware:
Canon: 3/5 points
Epson: 5/5 points
The Epson has the build quality clearly in the lead. The plastic components appear robust, the keys are stable and the removable or moving parts (paper cassette, Scan cover, etc) have a very high quality.
The Canon however, is indeed a looker visually, but more no longer. The plastic parts are very thin, especially the paper cassette is made of thin plastic so that the slider and the rails bend - who here so often change the formats sometimes experience COULD surprises in the form of broken plastic.
But what leads to big points deduction at Canon is the glossy varnish. One sees on the device really EVERYTHING. Although I have washed my before operating with soap your hands, there was already after entering the wireless password ugly imprints on the keys ... the tray cover the scanner feeder is also held in the gloss coating - with lightweight studs in plastic - the results that you can clean the thing worse. We first with a Microfastertuch (for glasses), the first attempt to remove "signs of use" - no chance. Next try: use eyeglass cleaner - which works beautifully, but immediately after using the button again, the impression exists. Only drawback: despite microfibre cloth and detergent fine micro-scratches in the paint are already visible - so who placed the device as we below a light source (overhead lights), just sees everything. The device is a candidate for "dark corners" or lockable boxes.
Here the Epson is different - the one he uses almost nowhere shiny panels - and even if they exist (in the control panel) is seen (almost) no fingerprints.
Why the Canon ink cartridges are the - is given to them properly, they shine. they are empty, they flash ... At Epson we were never sure if the cartridges are fixed securely enough - it shows only when the pressure test runs ... but is a marginal detail which do not affect the rating had.
Our impression: With Epson practical designers have worked to understand the everyday office life - Canon was the marketing department at work with the aim that "most brilliant and flamboyant device" to have the store shelf. They also create, as long as the device is an exhibit that nobody can attack - here the Epson acts next as the "ugly duckling" - up to use both devices ;-)
Included accessories:
Canon: 4/5 points
Epson: 3/5 points
Epson supplies with only one power cable, the cartridge, a manual and the driver CD.
At Canon, however, also a fax cable and a small addition of a small test set 10x15 photo paper is.
Why Epson here a point may depart: I bought both devices in a retail store and there THERE IS NO FAX cable. Conversely, as does a fax cable a fortune - why is so here saved and why the customer must then go on cable are looking for?
Print quality:
Canon: 5/5 points
Epson: 2/5 points
The print quality of the Epson printer has unfortunately can not convince us. To test the calculation of the printer was hergenommen and copied - so a typical bill with colored letterhead, a lot of text and a few shades of gray. For this purpose a handwritten note with pens that the goods have been delivered.
The Epson prints in "standard mode" compared to the Canon very rough. I would - regardless of the Canon considered - talk about a better than average print image - in direct comparison but are worlds between the two devices.
What I did not like the Epson:
a) The false color rendering of the letterhead and the coarse representation of the letterhead logo
b) Grey background with black text is simply printed with gray stripes, looks very ugly.
c) the text is grainy
d) the handwritten note as
With the change in quality on the highest quality of Epson's coarseness puts indeed somewhat, but manages to still NOT the gray background map - remain the strip - just not the correct color reproduction of the logo.
Now for Canon:
One can deal with quickly - already in the "standard quality" the copied document is almost indistinguishable from the original. Very interesting: the original can be seen mainly in the handwritten note (on the back you can see the pen-Pressing) - otherwise it would be only very close inspection to detect possible differences - WOW!
By the way: The highest quality from the MX925 differs only subtly from the "standard" method. Plus point!
The Features
Canon: 3.5 / 5
Epson: 5/5
I'm going to talk purely on the differences between the two models a, otherwise it will detail.
a) Epson: Rear tray available, Canon has none
b) Epson: card reader available, absent in Canon
c) USB and card reader can be mounted as network drives in Epson - the kicker: the printer can directly save the scans it, it does not necessarily have to be a computer available. The data can then be accessed from any computer - great idea! Canon can not unfortunately
d) Epson: ID Scan. Epson thinks - so who will front a driver's license and scan back and does not want to produce two pages - just select menu item and Epson makes it an expression - awesome. Canon can not even again.
e) Canon: Silent mode - very quiet and pleasant. Epson has something not - really "extremely loud" but he is not well.
Otherwise, the devices do not differ: duplex printing / scanning, various templates (millimeter paper, etc ... Canon has a bit more choice here), Google Cloud Print, cloud services, email, fax, etc ...
The installation / driver
Epson: 1/5 points
Canon: 5/5 points
Unfortunately, Epson shoots here completely out of the race. This begins once the driver installation. This takes forever and ever more windows are opened, all look different. After about 45 minutes Epson is then finished, but it does not work all at once. What exactly is missing and why you have to laboriously over the Internet in various forums or support pages looking together (for example, the Event Manager for scanning, missing port clearances, etc).
If you have anything (as far as one can judge the ever) installed, followed by the next disillusionment: The laptop (remember, I7, 8 GB RAM, Win7) is at boot extremely slowly. It takes about one minute until the desktop is available - even the background image (wallpaper) is just plain white background. An installation on another computer shows that it looks here no better, same reaction.
Once you can use the computer, is as good as anything is possible: configure printer settings via software, network access to USB drive and card reader (great!). The printer provides the good Tintentstand, status, etc back - so nice bidirectional communicative, our dear Epson. Heile Welt so? NO!
The important function for us from the printer via "Scan to PC" functionality to send data to the computer has not been possible. The internet is full of tips and tricks as well as instructions that could not be more (also read here at Amazon ...). After 6 hours (!!) play around (we were building even has its own new test network on), firmware upgrades, driver upgrades, firewall settings (up to total off), router configuration, so we gave up. Such difficulties we had never had with a network-enabled device.
The only workaround: save scans to a USB stick and then pick up via Netzlaufwwerkpfad a bad joke!
A small detail: an old netbook with Win XP 32bit recognized the Epson hesitation ... for us the proof that it is not on the network, but at the Epson driver suite. Here we were then arrived at the point where the device to send back. That was finally too much of a good thing, even if the hardware itself convinced and delighted so many a feature such as network drives.
In general you have to say that at Epson have worked apparently different programmers / teams / departments at various driver modules - the GUI's look at some cases, completely different from (eg italics vs. normal font vs. graphic button with "Ok") - and This has been simply a package onto a CD - somehow it'll work ...
Anders CANON: the GUI of Treiberinsstallation is almost entirely identical designed - only after installation to the Network Scan driver has to manually in the program menu - from this then runs automatically.
Installation costs: about 20 minutes, then everything worked as expected. The driver running quietly in the background - even in parallel with the old Canon driver of 5250 - without any problems!
Conclusion: To offer a half-baked software appropriate for the Customer and then (until now) no clear, coherent solution for the scanning problem is really weak from Epson. It may be that for many customers, the printer works as expected. But for us that was not the case nunmal. Not everything is perfect, but if already massively such errors occur, then a neat solution in the form of an update needs to be replenished, which also works. Instead, you can reprogram the customer half the firewall, enable ports, reconfigure routers ... ON SUSPICION, since these "solutions" can not guarantee success.
At Canon, however, the driver installation is a breeze - and on top of the computer running properly and performant. No network issues, so everything is as you would expect as a customer.
Printing costs and long-term experience:
not assessable for both devices, the Canon is only a few days in operation, the Epson we have given back early.
Long-term experience for Canon follow, unless they differ significantly from the above mentioned first impression.
Appreciation:
Canon: 4.5 / 5 (rounded down to 4 Amazon asterisk)
Epson: 2.5 / 5 (rounded down to 2 Amazon asterisk)
Reason CANON:
Deductions:
- Design (varnish) and processing (thin plastic)
- Equipment
- Funktioanlität
Plus points:
++ A great printed image, perfect copies!
++ Easy, quick installation
++ Also works (!!)
++ Driver performant
Reason Epson:
Deductions:
--- Driver Installation
- Driver unperformant
- Poor support
--- Non-functioning network scanning
- Quality of the printed image / copies
Plus points:
++ Design and processing (practical, high quality)
+++ Functions and features (for example, network drives USB / Card Reader !!, second paper tray back, etc ...)
Depending on the application at any reader can now decide for themselves where it has its specialties. Who do not need, for example, a network scan to PC, no Win7 has 64bit or even from potentially hours of configuration does not shy away and it does not hurt that you look at a copy that she is the one who gets certainly for less money the better package.
But if we want high-quality copies and all basic network features needed (especially network scans) and can dispense with additional features such as rear sheet feeder, card reader and network drives, putting on Canon - especially if he experienced no potential "drivers Disaster" want.
That was also the basis for our personal scoring that can certainly vary from user to user. A little jealous we are to all those buyers, where the Epson runs without friction - we would love to keep the unit, but not under these circumstances. The Canon in the Darth Vader look we'll have to hide somewhere - because the will "collect" on short or long scratches and fingerprints all over my body.
We hope that this review helps a decision between these two devices.
ps: of course can not guarantee that the Canon driver ANYWHERE function properly - on our computers, this is not the case.
