Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP

Custom Test Report
BLI Comparative Lab Test Report
MAY 2016
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Advantage 
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP
Print Quality
=
=
Copy Quality
=
=
Scan Capture Quality

Print Productivity

Copy Productivity

Scan Productivity
=
Banner Printing / Copying

Direct Print Submission Functionality
=
=
=
Walk-up Ease of Use

Device Feature Set

Print Driver Feature Set
BuyersLab.com

This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
TEST OBJECTIVE
Buyers Laboratory LLC (BLI) was commissioned by Canon Europe to conduct confidential document imaging
device performance testing on the Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 and the HP DesignJet T830 MFP, and
produce a report comparing the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two products in terms of image quality, productivity, banner printing, direct print submission functionality, walk-up ease of use, device feature set and
printer driver feature set. All testing was performed in BLI’s test facility in Wokingham, UK using the latest version
of firmware at the time of test.
Executive Summary
The Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 gave a clear demonstration of its superior print and copy productivity in BLI’s evaluation, and outperformed its HP DesignJet T830 MFP competitor in many test categories. Specifically, the Canon model delivered significantly faster colour and black print speeds in all tested modes, especially in High/Best modes where it delivered output in times that were 80% faster than those of the HP unit. The
iPF770 MFP L36 also excelled in all modes when printing BLI’s job stream, designed to simulate a typical mixed
workflow for a large-format unit. Moreover, the Canon unit successfully printed BLI’s banner image, whereas the
HP model only printed a portion of the banner. Similarly, the copy productivity performance advantage for the
Canon model over the HP model increased along with the quality mode, with copy speeds that were significantly
faster in Best quality mode. Another noteworthy feature, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 allows users to scan while
the device is printing, which is not possible with the HP model. Results in BLI’s scan productivity testing were
mixed, however, with the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 delivering faster scan speeds in the A1 throughput test for two
of the three quality modes while the HP T830 MFP had the advantage in A0 scan tests in colour, overall.
The iPF770 MFP L36 also offers some noteworthy features that boost productivity further: it’s capable of handling
ink and paper outages with minimal impact on user productivity or causing unnecessary waste. Inks can be
replaced on the fly without interrupting printing due to its unique sub-ink tank design. When it’s out of paper,
the Canon unit will pause and alert the operator. After a new roll is installed and the operator confirms the paper
type, it continues to print the interrupted page in full followed by all successive pages, thus reducing waste.
These scenarios are handled very differently by the HP model: ink cartridges cannot be replaced while the device is actively printing, leading to operator downtime. More seriously, when the HP model runs out of paper, it
stops and automatically cancels the entire job in progress. Users are forced to set up the job again once paper
is replenished and determine where to resume the job from the page on which it was interrupted, all of which
requires additional user intervention.
In terms of operational ease of use, the HP T830 MFP has some significant advantages over the Canon model,
particularly for walk-up activity. Sporting a large user friendly touchscreen control panel, print, scan and copy
screens are logically organized and users can swipe through options easily, plus a virtual keyboard aids input
of filenames and email addresses. Given that it is an entry level machine, the iPF770 MFP L36 is designed to
offer a more simplified user interface and functionality. For example, the Canon L36 scanner’s non-touchscreen
LED display is icon-based only, which makes the programming of copy and scan jobs a less intuitive process. In
addition, users cannot print from a USB drive, unlike with the HP device. However, the scanning of lightweight
originals is a far smoother process with the Canon model and no originals were damaged, whereas it was a
trickier process on the HP model with some results displaying visible creases and shadows across the output.
Conveniently, both models allow files to be retrieved from cloud storage for printing. The Canon model supports
direct print submission functionality via its easy to use Direct Print & Share utility, which offers ‘Shortcut Print’
functionality for more efficient workflows. The HP’s Mobile Printing service offers support for direct printing from
Apple or Android mobile devices via a wireless network connection or Wi-Fi Direct; users can also submit PDF,
2
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
TIFF and JPEG files remotely via email to the T830 MFP for printing. The HP T830 MFP offers very good support
for print from and scan to mobile devices via a free HP All in One Printer Remote app, with both iOS and Android
platforms supported. Canon offers an app which enables direct PDF printing, but only from Apple iPads.
As expected of models aimed at the Architectural, Engineering and Construction (AEC), Computer-Aided Design (CAD) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) markets, the image quality produced by both models
would easily satisfy customer expectations. Both models delivered excellent GIS graphics in High/Best mode on
plain paper, with a realistic three-dimensional rendering of topographical features and excellent colour business
graphics with sharp details. The Canon model delivered superior photographic print quality, with vibrant colours
and finer detailing, more natural-looking skin tones and a far larger colour gamut when printing on photo paper.
It also delivered better copied text and fine line output. The HP unit produced copy output with higher optical
density for all colours and more accurate colour fidelity when copying BLI’s Pantone corporate logo test chart;
superior greyscale and colour halftones coverage and a larger colour gamut in all quality modes when printing
on plain paper. Scan capture quality advantages were fairly even between the two models, although the Canon
unit had the edge with better text and more distinct fine lines.
In terms of device and driver feature sets, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 has plenty to offer over its HP competitor. In addition to its hot-swap ink tanks, its unidirectional print feature helps to eliminate banding, even in Fast
mode; it has smaller ink drop sizes; more media profiles; security watermark options; a wider number of colour
adjustment options; and it offers a flexible layout nesting option to save on paper (the HP model offers a similar
feature but doesn’t offer the user the same flexibility and control over image placement). Yet, the HP DesignJet
T830 MFP offers a stronger device feature set, overall. It’s a marginally more compact and lightweight device; it
offers a 1-GB non-upgradeable RAM (compared with Canon’s 256 MB); has Wi-Fi connectivity; and it consumes
less energy while printing—less than 35 watts compared with 140 watts with the Canon model. It also offers a
higher (300 ml) ink cartridge capacity for all colours (although Canon offers this same ink tank capacity for all
colours with the iPF780 sister model).
On the strength of its print and copy productivity performance alone, the Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP
L36 delivered a superior performance to that of the HP DesignJet T830 MFP. Plus, there are many advantages in
other areas, with its more vibrant colour print output overall, the ability to handle BLI’s banner test successfully
(which the HP failed to output) and a more feature-rich driver.
Print Quality
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP
Text
=
=
Fine Lines
=
=
Halftone Range
=
=
Advantage

Halftone Fill

Solid Density
=
AEC Graphics
=
=
GIS Graphics
=
=
Business Graphics
=
=
Photographic Images

Colour Gamut (plain paper, default settings)
Colour Gamut (photo paper, High/Best quality settings)
3
BuyersLab.com


This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
, — and  represent positive, negative and neutral attributes, respectively.
In the colour and black optical density evaluation, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 delivered superior optical densities on plain paper for cyan and magenta in all modes. It also had a higher optical density for composite black
in Best/High mode. The HP T830 MFP produced higher optical densities for composite black and black in Fast
and Normal modes; in Best/High mode, the two models had comparable optical density for black. For yellow,
the two models produced comparable optical densities in Fast and Standard/Normal modes, while the HP model
had the higher optical density in High quality mode.
 Fonts produced by the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 in black were crisp and legible down to the smallest (3-pt. level)
size across all quality settings, and had no noticeable bleed—a performance matched by the HP model. There
were some subtle differences in the text output of the two models in colour mode; characters produced by the
Canon iPF770 MFP L36 were legible down to the 3-pt. level in High quality mode; in Fast mode, its serif and sans
serif fonts were legible down to the 4-pt. level and 3-pt. level, respectively; and in Standard mode, fonts were
legible down to the 5-pt. level (serif) and 4-pt. level (sans serif). The HP model produced sans serif fonts that were
legible down to the 3-pt. level across all modes; its Times New Roman text was legible down to the 4-pt. level in
Fast and Standard modes, and 3-pt. level (Best). There was some slight ink bleed evident in both models’ output,
but it was a little more noticeable in text produced in Standard/Quality mode by the Canon iPF770 MFP L36.
Fine lines produced by both devices remained distinct down to the 0.1-pt. level (black on white) in all modes.
The fine lines produced by the HP model were rated as slightly more distinct in Normal mode, whilst the Canon
device’s fine lines were judged to be slightly better in the highest quality mode.
—Both devices delivered white-on-black fine lines at the 0.25-pt. level in all quality modes, the Canon output was
rated as poor in Fast mode and only fair in Standard mode, compared with the good ratings for the HP device in
these respective modes. In High/Best quality mode, both models’ fine lines were rated fair.
Both models delivered a very good halftone range—from the 10% to 100% dot-fill levels in all modes, with distinct transitions between all levels.
—The Canon iPF770 MFP L36 delivered good and consistent halftone fills in all modes. However, the HP model
had a slight advantage overall, due to its superior greyscales, with ‘truer’ neutral greys, and its colour halftones
were rated very good in Standard and Best quality modes.
—When evaluating Architectural, Engineering and Construction (AEC) graphics in Fast mode, the HP T830 MFP
delivered sharper, more distinct fine lines than the Canon model.
 AEC graphics produced in Standard/Normal mode were of comparable quality; the Canon unit delivered the better colour detailing whilst fine lines on the HP model’s output were slightly more distinct.
 In High/Best mode, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 delivered superior AEC graphics to the HP model, with sharper
lines and crisper characters.
When evaluating Geographic Information Systems (GIS) graphics in High/Best mode on plain paper, both units
delivered a fine level of detail and showed an equally good depth of field—a critical factor in delivering a realistic
three-dimensional rendering of topographical features.
Colour business graphics produced by both the HP and Canon devices exhibited sharp details and very good
colour saturation.
 When comparing photographic images produced in Standard/Normal and High/Best modes, the Canon model’s
output exhibited excellent detailing in dark and light contrast areas, more vibrant colours, and more naturallooking skin tones compared with output from the HP device, while the skin tones produced by the HP device
were distinctly yellowish-blueish in hue.
—When printing on plain paper, the HP T830 MFP delivered a slightly larger colour gamut in all three quality modes;
in Fast settings, it was larger by 2.0%, with a CIE volume of 200,555 versus a CIE volume of 196,671 for the
4
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon device; in Standard/Normal settings it was fractionally larger with a 232,661 CIE volume versus 228,330
for the Canon device; and in High/Best settings it was 4.9% larger, with a CIE volume of 248,331 versus 236,769
for the Canon model.
 However, when printing on photo-quality paper in Best/High quality mode, the Canon model delivered a 35.8%
larger colour gamut, with a CIE volume of 624,576, versus 460,023 for the HP unit.
 The Canon print driver has a unidirectional printing option, which can be employed to reduce or eliminate banding quality issues. The HP model does not have this feature.
Overall, results were mixed in BLI’s assessment of image quality, with neither model demonstrating a clear-cut
advantage. Both delivered excellent GIS graphics, good quality colour business graphics, distinct fine lines and
a consistent halftone range. The Canon iPF770 MFP L36’s photographic images were superior to those from the
HP unit, with more vibrant colours and better detailing, and skin tones were more natural-looking. It also delivered higher optical densities for cyan and magenta, and a far larger colour gamut when printing on photo paper.
The HP model produced a higher optical density for composite black in two of the three modes tested, better
colour text reproduction and colour halftone fills, overall, truer neutral greyscale coverage, plus it produced a
slightly larger colour gamut in all modes on plain paper.
Copy Quality
Advantage

Text
Fine Lines
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36


Solid density
Halftone reproduction
Colour Fidelity
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP

=
=

 In copy mode, the Canon model produced excellent text quality in all modes tested. Fonts were legible down to
the 6-pt. size (the smallest level on this chart) with crisp characters, no breakup and no sign of haloing. In copied
output produced by the HP device, fonts were legible down to the 6-pt. level in Fast mode, but with weaker character definition and some breakup evident at the top of the characters. In Normal and Best modes the HP unit
produced fonts that were legible at the 6-pt. level and dark, but were slightly less well defined when compared
with that of the Canon model, and some ghosting was evident (in Normal mode only).
 When evaluating fine lines on the QA-1 test chart (see below) where the emphasis is on evaluating whether there
is a clear distinction between lines, rather than the rendering of each line, the fine lines produced by the Canon
model in Draft/Fast mode remained distinct up to 2.2 cpm (cycles per millimeter) level, compared with up to 2.0
cpm for the HP unit. In Normal/Standard mode, fine lines were distinct up to the 2.8 level for the Canon model
and 2.5 for the HP device. In Best quality mode, lines were distinct up to the 3.6 level with the Canon device,
compared with up to the 2.8 level with the HP T830 MFP.
5
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Portion of QA-1 Image Evaluation Test Target used to evaluate fine
line reproduction
—Solid density was higher for all colours with the HP T830 MFP in all copy quality modes.
—Halftones produced by both units in all quality settings were well graduated in copy mode. Greyscale output
from the HP device was much better, displaying a ‘truer’ neutral grey, whereas greyscale output from the Canon
device displayed a slight magenta hue at the lower percentage fills, and its yellow halftones displayed a slight
cyan bias.
In Best quality mode, colour halftones were brighter on output from the HP model (as expected given its higher
solid densities), whilst the Canon model delivered smoother transitions from light to dark areas.
Solids on the QA-1 test chart reproduced with the Canon unit were dark and consistent in all quality modes.
Solids produced by the HP T830 MFP were less consistent in coverage, with slight mottling evident in Normal
mode; however, solids produced in Fast and Best modes matched the Canon output.
—In BLI’s colour fidelity testing, which is based on a select range of 12 saturated Pantone shades for corporate
logos, the HP device had a 14.8% lower average Delta E shift of 9.8 compared with 11.5 for the Canon unit.
6
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Scan Capture Quality
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP
Resolution and Sharpness at Optical Resolution
=
=
Text
=
=
Fine Lines

Geometric Accuracy

Halftone Capture Quality
=
Advantage

=
Note, when scanning in Standard mode on the Canon iPF770 MFP L36, the resolution is set at 400 dpi, whereas the equivalent mode on the HP
unit is set at 300 dpi; neither model gives users the option to adjust the resolution. Testing has been carried out in all quality modes available, but
as there is some disparity with the middle quality setting resolution dpi, it is not possible to conduct a strictly like-for-like comparison. However,
for the purposes of this evaluation, scanned output conducted in Standard (400 dpi) mode on the Canon unit and Normal (300 dpi) on the HP
model will be reviewed as in real-world environments these are the next available settings from Draft/Fast for end users to select.

As illustrated below (under magnification) the Canon model delivered fonts that displayed none of the ghosting
that was apparent in fonts with the HP model, however the HP’s fonts are more distinct.
Canon (left) and HP (right) fonts at maximum resolution. The Canon iPF770 MFP L36’s fonts are darker but they’re less well
defined. Although the HP T830 MFP’s fonts exhibit a lot of haloing, they are more distinct.

Text produced by both models in Standard/Normal mode was legible down to the smallest 6-pt. level, with very
little difference between them.
7
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon (left) and HP (right) fonts in Standard/Normal resolution settings. Note the pronounced stair-stepping in diagonal lines (K,
M, N) from both models.
Canon (left) and HP (right) fine line pairs at maximum resolution.
Canon (left) and HP (right) fine line pairs in Standard/Normal resolution.
8
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon (left) and HP (right) fine line pairs in Standard/Normal resolution. Note the colour fringing
on the HP fine lines at the 4.5 level, whereas the Canon model’s fine lines at the 4.5 level are more
distinct.
 In the MTF Line Pairs Test, where the emphasis is on evaluating whether there is a clear distinction between
lines, rather than the rendering of each line, fine lines in Standard/Normal mode were distinct up to the 4.5 level
in output produced by the Canon unit, but only to the 4.0 level in output produced by the HP model.
 Using the Adobe Photoshop Measuring Tool to evaluate geometric accuracy (defined as the variation between
the actual document measurement and the length of the scanned image), the Canon model delivered highly
impressive accuracy, with a variation of just 0.1 mm in landscape and 0.2 mm in portrait orientation, compared
with the HP model’s 0.8 mm in landscape and 0.9 mm in portrait (see Supporting Test Data).
When scanning the mixed text/image BLI test chart in full colour in Standard/Normal mode, BLI analysts found
that the Canon MFP delivered far more subtle gradations of halftone shades in light contrast areas but lost some
integrity in darker areas, whereas the HP T830 MFP delivered good detailing in dark contrast areas.
Halftone capture in full colour Standard/Normal mode with the Canon (left) and HP (right) models.
9
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
HP DesignJet T830 MFP scanner’s staggered array design can lead to some blurring and
lead/trail edge steps (image magnified 300%).
Print Productivity
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP
First Page Out from Weekend of Non-Use
=
=
First Page Out from Ready State

Throughput Speed (fastest mode)

Throughput Speed (default mode)

Throughput Speed (highest-quality mode)

Job Stream (multiple jobs submitted to device in fast
succession simulating busy network environment)

Advantage


The Canon iPF770 MFP L36 delivered a faster first-page-out time of 84.87 seconds after a weekend of non-use,
compared with 98.87 seconds for the HP device. While the HP T830 MFP demonstrated a quicker warm-up time
before printing commenced (26.09 seconds versus 41.82 seconds for the Canon model), taking into account the
two measurements together, the two model’s times were comparable overall.
The Canon iPF770 delivered a faster first-page-out time of just 38.98 seconds from its ready state, compared
with 92.53 seconds for the HP device. Warm-up time before printing commenced was 13.91 seconds for the
Canon model, compared with 19.06 seconds for the HP unit.
 When printing BLI’s job stream, designed to simulate a typical mixed workflow for a large-format unit, the Canon
model was the faster model across the board. It was 35.8% faster than the HP model in Fast mode; 33.0% faster
in Standard/Normal mode; and an impressive 78.5% faster in High quality/Best mode.
10
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
 When printing BLI’s 12-page DWF test file in colour, the Canon unit was 35.4% faster in Fast mode, 32.3% faster
in Standard/Normal mode, and 80.9% faster in High quality/Best mode when compared with the HP unit.
 When printing BLI’s 12-page DWF test file in monochrome, the Canon unit was 36.5% faster in Fast mode, but
slightly (7.9%) slower than the HP model in Standard/Normal mode. In High quality/Best mode, the Canon model
was much faster (by 80.4%) than the HP unit.
In BLI’s single-page A0-size House 3D PDF test, the iPF770 MFP L36 delivered a first-page-out time that was
39.7% faster than the HP T830 MFP unit. Similarly, the time to print five A0-size pages was 39.6% faster for the
Canon unit than that of the HP device.
 The Canon model’s unique sub-ink tank system provides an additional productivity advantage for users. When
ink needs replacing on the iPF770 MFP L36, it still continues to print (drawing ink from its sub tank). As inks can
be replaced while printing is in progress, no ink or paper is wasted and there is no operator downtime. Conversely, when the HP T830 MFP model runs out of ink, printing has to stop for the cartridge to be replaced, which
leads to operator downtime.
 When the HP model runs out of paper, it stops and automatically cancels the entire job in progress, even if it’s in
the middle of a multi-page print run. Users are forced to resubmit the whole job once paper is replenished. This
has a negative impact on productivity, since the operator must determine the number of the last page printed
and then resubmit the job from that point to avoid wasting unnecessary paper and ink. The Canon model, in contrast, will pause operation and alert the operator. After a new roll is installed, the operator is prompted to confirm
the paper type. The job will continue printing from the beginning of the interrupted page, rather than printing the
portion of the page that remained before running out of paper, so less ink and paper is wasted and no further
user action required.
The HP display message alerts users to replace the media roll
and that the current job has been cancelled.
Copy Productivity
Advantage
11
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36

A1 (Landscape) First Page Out

A0 First Page Out

BuyersLab.com
HP
DesignJet T730
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
 In BLI’s A1 (Landscape) testing in Draft/Fast mode, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36’s first-copy-out time was 27.8%
faster in monochrome, 30.8% faster in greyscale, and slightly (7.7%) slower in colour than the HP unit.
 In BLI’s A1 (Landscape) testing in Standard/Normal mode, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36’s first-copy out time was
41.0% faster in monochrome, 43.3% faster in greyscale and 29.3% faster in colour than the HP DesignJet T830
MFP.
 In Best quality mode, the Canon model was 69.6% faster in monochrome, 69.4% faster in greyscale and 47.8%
faster in colour than the HP unit.
 In BLI’s A0 testing in Draft/Fast mode, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36’s first-copy out time was 29.0% faster than
that of the HP model in monochrome and 29.7% faster in greyscale.
—However, the Canon model was 15.9% slower in colour than the HP model.
In Standard/Normal mode, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36’s A0 first-copy out time was 41.7% faster in monochrome, 43.2% faster in greyscale and 28.3% faster in colour than the HP model.
 In Best quality mode, the Canon model was 71.0% faster in monochrome, 72.4% faster in greyscale and 48.6%
faster in colour than the HP unit.
Helping to boost productivity, users can scan at the Canon L36 scanner concurrently as the Canon iPF770 is
printing. The HP T830 MFP cannot scan and print simultaneously.
Scan Productivity
Advantage
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36

A1 Single-Page Scanning (Draft/Fast)

A1 Single-Page Scanning (Standard/Normal)
A1 Single-Page Scanning (Best)


A0 Single-Page Scanning (Draft/Fast)


A0 Single-Page Scanning (Standard/Normal)
A0 Single-Page Scanning (Best)

First Page Out to Desktop (monochrome/
greyscale modes)

First Page Out to Desktop (colour mode)
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP

 Neither model supports batch scanning functionality, which, in some environments, could have an adverse effect
on productivity.
 As mentioned earlier, Standard mode, the second quality scan setting on the Canon model is set at 400 dpi while
the HP unit offers its second scan quality setting at 300 dpi, with neither model offering the option to adjust the
resolution. Testing was carried out in all quality modes available to an end user.
In BLI’s A1 (Landscape) scan throughput testing, timing from initiation to the original exiting the scanner, the
12
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon iPF770 MFP L36 was 9.1% faster than the HP model in monochrome in Draft/Fast mode, and 39.5%
faster in Best quality mode; in greyscale, the Canon model was 10.7% faster in Draft/Fast and 39.8% faster in
Best quality mode; in colour, the Canon model was 39.1% faster in Draft/Fast and 9.5% faster in Best quality
mode.
—However, when tested in Standard/Normal mode; the Canon model was 31.9% slower in monochrome, 25.0%
slower in greyscale mode. Both units had a comparable time when tested in colour mode.
—In BLI’s A0 scan throughput testing in monochrome mode, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 was 9.2% slower than
the HP model in Draft/Fast and 57.5% slower in Standard/Normal mode.
 However, in Best quality mode the Canon was 33.0% faster than the HP unit.
 In BLI’s A0 scan throughput testing in greyscale mode, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 was 7.9% faster than the HP
model in Draft/Fast mode, 55.8% faster in Standard/Normal mode and 32.5% faster in Best quality mode.
—However, when tested in colour mode; the Canon model was 20.2% slower in Draft/Fast mode, 133.4% slower
in Standard/Normal mode and 65.9% slower in Best quality mode than the HP unit.
 In BLI’s scan-to-desktop A1 (Landscape) testing, measuring the time taken from initiation to the scan appearing
at the desktop, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 was 62.7% faster than the HP model in monochrome in Draft/Fast
mode, 48.0% faster in Standard/Normal mode and 70.9% faster in Best quality mode; in greyscale the Canon
model was 56.9% faster in Draft/Fast mode, 26.3% faster in Standard/Normal mode and 41.7% faster in Best
quality mode.
—However, the Canon model was slower than the HP unit when tested in colour; it was 16.1% slower in Draft/Fast
mode, 105.4% slower in Standard/Normal mode and 48.7% slower in Best quality mode.
 In BLI’s scan-to-desktop A0 testing, the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 was 67.9% faster than the HP model in monochrome in Draft/Fast mode, 52.0% faster in Standard/Normal and 72.3% faster in Best quality mode; in greyscale
the Canon model was 59.1% faster in Draft/Fast, 29.5% faster in Standard/Normal and 51.5% faster in Best
quality mode.
 In colour, the Canon model was 32.9% faster in Draft/Fast mode.
—However, it was 25.7% slower in Standard/Normal and 8.5% slower in Best quality mode when compared with
the HP model.
Banner Printing

Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
Banner printing capability

Productivity

Advantage
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP
 The Canon iPF770 MFP L36 successfully printed BLI’s 36" x 105" banner (a 4,955-KB PDF file) in Fast mode,
taking 32.7 seconds to generate a preview, and a further 3 minutes, 26.06 seconds from preview to final paper
cut.
13
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
The HP DesignJet T830 MFP was unable to print the banner in Fast or Standard modes. It printed the background only, with a great deal of banding across the full width, and none of the actual image detail; there was no
error message displayed on the device.
BLI’s Banner Test File
Direct Print Submission Functionality
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP
Ease of Use
=
=
Functionality
=
=
Advantage


Available as a free download from Canon’s website, the iPF Direct Print & Share utility enables the direct
printing of PDF, JPEG, TIFF and HPGL/2 files without the need for native applications or print drivers. The
utility allows the user to preview print layouts and choose print settings without opening up the driver properties. It also lets the user print multiple files simultaneously.
14
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon’s iPF Direct Print & Share utility, showing a preview of the downloaded image in the centre and a
wide range of settings on the right.

iPF Direct Print & Share supports “Shortcut Print” functionality, which enables users to define several print settings that might be commonly used in combination and represent them with a desktop icon. Files are automatically printed with the predefined settings when users drag-and-drop them to the icon. Multiple desktop icons
can be created for different print settings or combinations of print settings.
Retrieving files from Google Drive using iPF Direct Print & Share.
15
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP

Users can retrieve files from Google and AutoCAD 360 cloud storage services for printing via iPF Direct Print &
Share; the utility lets users upload files to cloud storage while also offering the option of sharing files with other
users at the same time (Google Drive only).
 The HP Mobile Printing service allows users to print directly from an iOS or Android smart device to a compatible
HP large-format device. Unlike the previous version (ePrint & Share), users do not need to create an account in
order to access direct print functionality, instead, the mobile device quickly pairs with the printer via a wireless
network connection or by Wi-FI Direct for direct job submission. Android users have the extra step, however,
of downloading and enabling the free HP Print Service Plugin app, which is available from Google Play, before
being able to access the HP Printing service. Users can print a wide selection of file formats such as Microsoft
Office documents, as well as PDF, JPEG and TIFF files; when they wish to print a file either stored locally on
their device, an email attachment, or a document stored in a cloud service account, the user just needs to open
the file and then selects the Share or Send option, which then allows them to select and send their job to their
preferred HP printer.
The HP Mobile Printing service enables Android and iOS mobile devices to pair with the T830 MFP and other compatible HP devices
easily. Users can retrieve files from cloud storage, preview images and perform image adjustments.

In addition, the T830 MFP supports HP ePrint functionality, whereby users are able to send print jobs remotely
by email either from their workstation PC or from their mobile device to the device; PDF, TIFF and JPEG files (up
to 10 MB) are supported.
16
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
The T830 MFP supports HP’s All-in-One Printer Remote mobile app for Android and iOS devices. The app lets
users scan documents directly to their mobile device, retrieve and print or upload files to a variety of cloud storage services such as Dropbox, Box, Google Drive and Evernote. For iOS version, social media connectivity with
Facebook is offered. The HP AiO mobile app allows users to monitor printer status and order replacement ink.
 The Canon model also supports a free mobile print app, the Canon imagePROGRAF Print Utility, which enables
PDF printing, but only from Apple iPads to facilitate workflows for mobile workers.
The Canon imagePROGRAF Print Utility lets users print PDF files directly to the iPF770 MFP L36 from their iPads; it offers an image
preview and users have the ability to select printer options, such as orientation and colour mode.
17
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
The HP AiO Printer Remote mobile app for Android and iOS devices offers scan to/print from functionality and lets users save files to
cloud storage services and send by email (the iOS app version is shown here).
Walk-Up Ease of Use
Advantage
Canon
imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36

Interface
18
HP
DesignJet T830 MFP

Scanner Media Handling

Print Media Handling
=
User Maintenance/Consumable Replacement

=
Copy Programming

Scan to Desktop/Network Folder Programming

Scan to email/USB/Cloud Programming

Stored Job Reprinting (including via USB key
and cloud)

BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon iPF770 MFP L36 Single Sensor array extends
across full width of the scanner. HP DesignJet T830 MFP scanner design employs a staggered
array of RGB LEDs, which can impact on image quality (see page 10).
Canon iPF770 MFP L36 Colortrac scanner’s desktop utility offers basic configuration
settings.
Canon’s L36 Scanner control panel.
19
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon iPF770 MFP L36 Control panel displaying its Copy screen (left) and Scan to PC screen (right).
HP DesignJet T830 MFP Home Screen
HP DesignJet T830 MFP Scan Screen
HP DesignJet T830 MFP Scan to Network Folder Settings Screen
20
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
HP DesignJet T830 MFP Copy Settings Screens
Media Handling
 Both MFPs are compatible with a wide range of media types. The Canon unit supports 29 media types, plus
five user-defined media, while the HP unit supports 25, including Coated, Heavyweight Coated, Blueprint and,
for photographs, Satin Photo, Premium Gloss and Semi-gloss media, among others. A specific drying time is
built into many of the selections to ensure that prints will be dry after completion. Custom media types can be
added and saved as well.
 Both models feature a single-roll design.
BLI analysts found loading cut-sheet media to be equally straightforward on both models. The Canon model
has an adjustable insertion guide that makes inserting cut-sheet media an easy process, and similarly, the HP
T830 MFP has guides which can slide into position in tandem to hold the paper in place. Both devices require
users to remove roll media first before they can print on cut-sheet media.
—However, printing with cut-sheet media is much easier on the HP T830MFP as it can accommodate more
sheets than the Canon device, with a 5mm-deep sheet feeder to Canon’s single sheet feeder. This means the
operator spends less time at the HP device feeding in cut sheet media, while its handy slide-out catch tray
holds printed sheets neatly. The Canon model does not have a catch tray so the operator will need to collect
each printed sheet as soon as it exits the device.
 The Canon iPF770 MFP L36 was able to scan and copy lightweight documents, such as a double page newspaper spread, in both portrait and landscape without any issue. In contrast, BLI analysts found the process
21
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
trickier on the HP T830 MFP; the successful feeding of lightweight documents in portrait and landscape into the
scanner was dependent on how well the rollers took hold of the spread. It took several attempts to do this successfully, and at times the newspaper original creased badly and jammed, with the operation being cancelled
entirely. Final scan quality was consistently good with the Canon model, but there was some slight showthrough
of dark solid areas from the reverse side evident on its scanned newsprint image. When the HP device successfully scanned and copied newsprint and magazine page originals, the final output quality was affected by how
smoothly the originals had fed through the individual rollers, with some results showing a lot of shadows and
creasing across the whole image, which in places impaired text legibility, while other results were of a much better quality, and showed sharper and brighter detailing (as befitting its higher copy densities).
A failed attempt to feed newsprint in landscape on the HP T830 MFP.
Both models successfully copied a magazine spread, but BLI analysts observed the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 (left) delivered more
consistent results, with none of the shadows as seen on the results from the HP T830 MFP (right).
22
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP

However, when the HP T830 MFP did copy originals cleanly, the quality (shown right) was crisper
and brighter than that of the Canon model (shown left), which reflects the T830 MFP’s higher
copy densities. Original was copied in 300 dpi.
 Both units coped well when handling creased or folded originals.
The catch baskets of both models enable most printed sheets to be stacked neatly. However, there was little to
distinguish between the two models when the end of the media rolls approached, as the tightly curled output
from both models had a tendency to spill out of the basket.
—The HP device includes an automatic deskew function (which users can enable on the device) allowing skew to
be compensated prior to delivery to the desktop; the Canon model does not possess this capability.
User Maintenance/Consumable Replacement
Ink replacement is a very simple process for both devices.
Ink cartridges can be replaced during operation with the Canon model but not with the HP device, helping to
reduce downtime for Canon users.
23
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Ink replacement on both devices is straightforward. On the Canon model (shown left) users
simply lift the ink housing cover on the printer’s left (C,M,Y) or right (MBK, K) sides, then
unlatch and remove the ink tank that is indicated to be at a low level and replace it. Each of
the four colour ink tanks on the HP T830 MFP (shown right) is slotted differently to prevent
users from inserting a tank in the wrong position.
 The printheads are user replaceable and it’s a straightforward process on both models.
The Canon device includes a maintenance cartridge that will occasionally need to be changed. This process
cannot be conducted during printing. Note: BLI did not need to replace any maintenance cartridge during its
extensive tests.
 As the HP device recalibrates at every power cycle, operators need to be vigilant and ensure the reference plates
on the device are kept clean, otherwise the unit will calibrate in any dirty marks, which will affect image quality
integrity.
The HP DesignJet T830 MFP Utility monitors jobs and consumable levels.
24
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon’s Status Monitor also provides feedback on consumable levels.
Copy Programming
 Programming a copy job on the Canon involves multiple key presses making it a more laborious task. User can
select quantity, resolution, size, brightness, contrast and crop; no presets are available, although current settings
can be saved as the power-on default option.
—The HP T830 MFP offers three image type presets (Image, Lines and Mixed originals). When a preset is selected,
users can specify a number of job control settings, which include number of copies, paper source and quality
mode. More advanced printer driver level job control options can be accessed via the settings cog icon on the
touchscreen display. These include lighter/darker adjustments, background noise removal, background colour
removal and auto-deskew, among others. Users can save the current settings as the new default settings to be
applied to future jobs.
Scan to Desktop/Network Folder Programming
 When scanning a document on the iPF770 MFP L36, users cannot preview the scan adjustments or edit the
filename prior to release. Image adjustment settings include white point, black point and brightness. A scan file is
saved to the designated destination specified in the L36 utility. Users can only edit filenames at the PC desktop.
— Users must use the web browser to set up the file destination for scan-to-network operations on the HP T830
MFP, and it cannot be changed at the device. Users cannot preview the scan at the device, but they can make
adjustments for settings such as lighter/darker, background noise removal and background colour removal; they
can also edit the filename at the device which makes it easier to identify files when back at the desktop.
25
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Scan to email/USB/Cloud Programming
 Users are unable to scan directly to cloud or to email at the Canon iPF770 MFP L36, however they can scan to
the iPF Direct & Share utility and upload files to cloud storage.
—Users are able to scan directly to email at the HP T830 MFP, and they can scan to cloud services via the HP AiO
Printer Remote mobile app.
Users can scan directly to a USB drive inserted on the Canon iPF770 MFP L36; however files are saved in TIFF
format only which potentially could mean users having to work with very large file sizes. When a USB drive is
inserted, the USB drive menu does not pop up automatically so the user must initiate its use by selecting the
Scan to USB function on the control panel. During the scan process an hourglass icon is displayed to signify
scanning is in progress, but there’s no notification message on the display screen to notify users that scanning is
completed or that the file was successfully saved to the USB drive; the display just reverts to the default screen
once the scan is completed. Scan files are saved automatically to the USB’s root directory. Users will find that
the file has automatically been assigned a number (‘SCAN0001’) which has to be renamed at the PC.
—When a USB drive is inserted on the HP T830 MFP, the machine auto detects and registers it on the touchscreen
display; it provides the user with two options, ‘Print Documents’ or ‘Scan To’. When scanning to USB, users can
opt to save the file in JPEG, TIFF or PDF format, and make other selections like resolution and colour mode,
and, usefully, they can input a file name. When scanning to PDF format, the T830 MFP prompts users to either
add another page (allowing multi-page scan documents to be created) or complete the job. Users are notified
when the scan job is completed and the file is saved successfully on the USB drive; users must actively eject the
original from the device. Scan files are saved into a specific sub-folder (HPSCANS) which has been automatically
created on the USB drive.
—HP users can scan direct to their Android or iOS mobile device using the All-in-One Printer Remote mobile app,
however they will need to be at the scanner device to insert the document and eject it.
Upon scanning an original on the T830 MFP, users are provided with a notification message
and they must eject the original as well.
Stored Job Reprinting (including via USB key and cloud)
—Printing from a USB stick (not available with the Canon model) is a straightforward process on the HP T830 MFP,
with full control over document settings, although the HP T830 MFP’s lack of support for printing PDF files (only
available with the more expensive PostScript version of the MFP) is clearly a limitation. Users can browse in subfolders to select files to print and a preview (TIFF or JPEG only) will appear on the touchscreen.
26
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
 Jobs that need reprinting on the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 can quickly and easily be retrieved from cloud storage
using the Direct Print & Share utility, with the same Preview & Edit functionality giving full control over output
quality and settings. A direct link to the driver is also available so that advanced settings, including those for Account Manager, can be reviewed and selected.
— The HP Mobile Printing service allows users to print directly from
an iOS or Android smart device to a compatible HP large-format device.
See the section on Direct Print Submission above for BLI’s analysis of the differences between the two utilities
in terms of functionality and ease of use.
Device Feature Set
The Canon MFP’s L36 scanner offers three (200, 400 and 600 dpi) scanning resolutions, as does the HP unit’s
scanner (200, 300 and 600 dpi).
 The Canon L36 scanner can handle documents up to 38" by 15 m in size compared with 36" by 15 m with the
HP scanner.
—The Canon L36 scanner can only accommodate media up to 0.5 mm thick, while the HP unit’s scanner can accommodate 0.8 mm thick originals.
—The HP T830 MFP lets users scan and create multipage PDF documents, as well as scan to email, whereas the
Canon model does not, meaning that users will need to do this manually in the native application at the desktop.
—The Canon iPF770 MFP L36 offers 130ml ink tanks for all colours as opposed to the HP T830 MFP’s higher capacity 300ml cartridges for all colours.
 The total capacity of Canon’s starter cartridges (490 ml) is much more generous than the 189 ml provided by HP.
 Ink cartridges can be replaced during operation with the Canon model, but not with the HP device.
 The Canon unit supports a larger diameter of roll paper (150 mm as opposed to 100 mm with the HP device); it
supports up to 0.8 mm as the maximum media thickness for the printer as opposed to the HP model’s support
for a maximum of 0.3 mm.
— The HP device supports a fractionally higher maximum cut-sheet media length of 1.676 m compared with 1.6 m
for the Canon unit.
Both models offer easy and quick roll paper loading with auto paper feed—once the user loads paper on the
devices, alignment and width adjustments are automatically carried out without further user intervention.
Both models offer USB 2.0 and Gigabit Ethernet connectivity.
—The HP device offers direct Wi-Fi connectivity, which is not available with the Canon model.
— The Canon model offers a standard, non-upgradable RAM capacity of 256 MB, while the HP unit has a standard,
non-upgradable RAM of 1 GB.
Neither model offers a hard drive, even as an option.
—The HP T830 MFP is a fractionally more compact device than the Canon model, with a weight of 62.5 kg versus
64.6 kg for the Canon unit.
—The HP T830 MFP’s rated power consumption (35 W) is far lower than that of the Canon model’s (140 W or less)
while printing. In standby mode (where devices are likely to spend most of their time), the Canon unit’s power
consumption (0.5 W) is slightly higher than the HP model’s 0.2 W power consumption.
27
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Rated noise emissions while active are comparable (48 dB for both models).
— In standby mode, rated noise emissions are lower for the HP device (16 dB versus 35 dB with the Canon model).
Driver Feature Set
 The Canon iPF770 has five speed settings (Fast 300, Standard 600, Fast 600, High 600 and 1200), as opposed
to three with the HP device (Fast, Normal and Best).
 Seven predefined profiles are available with the Canon driver, while the HP driver offers a range of five.
 The Canon GARO driver provides an overview of the settings for predefined profiles, unlike HP’s HP-GL/2 driver.
 The Canon driver supports multi-up (2 to 16) printing, which the HP driver doesn’t support.
 The Canon GARO driver has a poster mode (2 by 2) that is not available from the HP driver.
 Unlike the HP driver, the Canon driver offers page stamping (Date, Time, Name and Page Number).

The Canon GARO driver offers a wider range of built-in adjustments for CMYK balance, brightness, contrast and
saturation than the HP-GL/2 driver. ICC profile settings are also available in the GARO driver’s matching tab under Advanced Settings. Canon operators can select four matching modes (driver, ICC, driver ICM and host ICM
matching) and choose one of four rendering methods (auto, perceptual, colorimetric or saturation). Note that a
wide range of colour management profiles are available when the HP driver and colour management tools (from
the Printing Preferences menu) are downloaded from HP’s website, plus the ability to preview images before
printing—features which were not included in the Startup driver disk supplied to BLI with the device.
 The Canon driver offers the option of using unidirectional printing, even in Fast mode, which helps to avoid banding across output because the printhead travels in only one direction to create the desired image. The HP driver
does not offer this feature.
 The Canon driver includes the Color imageRUNNER Enlargement Copy Mode utility, which is standard with
the 32-bit version of the driver and is available as a download for the 64-bit version of the driver via the Printer
Driver Extra Kit. This enables users to integrate a Canon small-format MFP device with the iPF770. Documents
scanned by the Canon MFP are automatically routed to a hot folder that is monitored by the driver of the iPF770.
The image can be resized and printed, offering a fast, easy-to-use poster creation tool for office users. The HP
driver lacks this feature.
 The Canon driver also includes a Free Layout nesting tool (available for free download via the Printer Driver Extra
Kit) that enables files—even those created with different applications—to be scaled, resized, or grouped together as a single job from the printer driver. Images can be dragged and dropped to their desired locations and
printed together on a single page, helping to save on paper. The HP unit offers a similar nesting feature, which
can be activated directly on the control panel or from the print driver utility. However, unlike the Canon tool, it
does not allow users to have precise control over the positioning of jobs, rather it will randomly position jobs to
print across the width of a page, either in job order sent or in ‘optimized’ layout order.
 The Canon (but not the HP) model also offers a plug-in for printing from Microsoft Office applications, which
includes useful tools for automatic media resizing, nesting and borderless printing.
28
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
SUPPORTING TEST DATA
Print Productivity
Job Stream Productivity
Mixed File Types, Same Size
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
Fast
650.84
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
Fast
1,013.13
35.8%
Standard
1,176.97
Normal
1,756.81
33.0%
High
1,804.76
Best
8,394.62
78.5%
BLI’s job stream consists of 10 files, including PDF, TIFF and DWF files totalling 19 pages, all at Arch D-size. This test replicates the type of traffic
a typical wide-format device might experience in a real-world, multi-user environment. All of the files are submitted to the controller in a specific
order and sent to the printer as a group, at which time the stopwatch begins; timing ends when the last page of the last file exits the device. Both
devices were loaded with 914 mm rolls, with each file set to auto-rotate to save media. device. Both devices were loaded with 914 mm rolls,
with each file set to auto-rotate to save media.
Colour Multi-Page Productivity
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Fast
407.13
Fast
Standard
757.81
High
1,094.83
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
629.84
35.4%
Normal
1,119.84
32.3%
Best
5,723.30
80.9%
The 12-page DWF test file was printed using the device driver set to the plain paper/colour setting. Both devices were loaded with 914-mm
rolls with each file set to auto-rotate to save media. The actual time indicated is the time it took to RIP, image and deliver all pages of the test
document to the collection bin.
Monochrome Multi-Page Productivity
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
Fast
398.53
Fast
627.28
36.5%
Standard
767.17
Normal
711.30
-7.9%
5,681.55
80.4%
High
1,111.56
Best
The 12-page DWF test file was printed with the Canon driver set to the plain paper/monochrome setting and the HP driver set to plain paper,
greyscale, black ink only. Both devices were loaded with 914 mm rolls, with each file set to auto-rotate to save media. The actual time indicated
is the time it took to RIP, image and deliver all pages of the test document to the collection bin.
First-Page-Out Productivity after a Weekend of Non-Use
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
Time Before Printing Commences
41.82
26.09
-60.3%
First Page Out
84.87
98.87
14.2%
29
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
First-Page-Out Productivity From Ready State
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
Time Before Printing Commences
13.91
19.06
27.0%
First Page Out
38.98
92.53
57.9%
First-page-out times are obtained by sending an Arch D-size PDF file to print, timed from release to page out with the Canon driver set to
the plain paper/monochrome setting and the HP driver set to plain paper, greyscale, black ink only. Both devices were loaded with 914-mm
rolls, with each file set to auto-rotate to save media.
A0 First-Page-Out and Throughput Productivity
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
A0 First-Page-Out and Throughput
Productivity
13.91
19.06
27.0%
First Page Out
38.98
92.53
57.9%
First Page Out
38.98
92.53
57.9%
First-page-out times are obtained by sending an Arch D-size PDF file to print, timed from release to page out with the Canon driver set to
the plain paper/monochrome setting and the HP driver set to plain paper, greyscale, black ink only. Both devices were loaded with 914-mm
rolls, with each file set to auto-rotate to save media.
Copy Productivity
A1 (Landscape) First-Copy-Out Productivity: Draft/Fast mode
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Mono
Draft 300/300
46.7
Fast
64.7
Greyscale
Draft 300/300
46.7
Fast
67.5
Colour
Draft 300/300
75.4
Fast
70.0
The single-page A1 (L) document was set to copy at 300-dpi scan resolution on the Canon device, with document size set to A1 (Landscape). Print settings were set to Fast mode. Times were recorded from scan initiation to page exiting.
A1 (Landscape) First-Copy-Out Productivity: Standard /Normal mode
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Mono
Standard 300/600
61.9
Normal
105.0
Greyscale
Standard 300/600
61.9
Normal
109.1
Colour
Standard 300/600
85.2
Normal
120.5
The single-page A1 (L) document was set to copy at 300-dpi scan resolution with document size set to A1 (Landscape). Print settings were
set to Standard/Normal. Times were recorded from scan initiation to page exiting.
A1 (Landscape) First-Copy-Out Productivity: Best mode
30
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Mono
Best 600/600
113.4
Best
372.9
Greyscale
Best 600/600
113.3
Best
370.5
Colour
Best 600/600
205.2
Best
392.8
The single-page A1 (L) document was set to copy at 600-dpi scan resolution with document size set to A1 (Landscape). Print settings
were set to High/Best mode. Times were recorded from scan initiation to page exiting.
A0 (Landscape) First-Copy-Out Productivity: Draft/Fast mode
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Mono
Draft 300/300
78.9
Fast
111.1
Greyscale
Draft 300/300
79.7
Fast
113.3
Colour
Draft 300/300
143.3
Fast
123.6
The single-page A0 (L) document was set to copy at 300-dpi scan resolution with document size set to A0 (Landscape). Print settings
were set to Fast mode. Times were recorded from scan initiation to page exiting.
A0 (Landscape) First-Copy-Out Productivity: Standard/Normal mode
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Mono
Standard 300/600
109.3
Normal
187.6
Greyscale
Standard 300/600
108.8
Normal
191.6
Colour
Standard 300/600
157.2
Normal
219.2
The single-page A0 (L) document was set to copy at 300-dpi scan resolution with document size set to A0 (Landscape). Print settings
were set to Standard/Normal. Times were recorded from scan initiation to page exiting.
A0 (Landscape) First-Copy-Out Productivity: Best mode
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Mono
Best 600/600
206.6
Best
712.6
Greyscale
Best 600/600
206.6
Best
749.4
Colour
Best 600/600
396.1
Best
770.3
The single-page A0 (L) document was set to copy at 600-dpi scan resolution with document size set to A0 (Landscape). Print settings
were set to High/Best mode. Times were recorded from scan initiation to page exiting.
31
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Scan Productivity
A1 Single-Page Scanning Productivity
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Scan Time (seconds)
Scan Time (seconds)
Black 200 dpi
10.0
11.0
9.1%
Black 400/300 dpi
18.2
13.8
-31.9%
Black 600 dpi
26.2
43.3
39.5%
Grey 200 dpi
10.0
11.2
10.7%
Grey 400/300 dpi
18.0
14.4
-25.0%
Grey 600 dpi
26.3
43.7
39.8%
Full Colour 200 dpi
26.2
43.0
39.1%
Full Colour 400/300dpi
49.5
49.3
-0.4%
Full Colour 600 dpi
96.9
107.1
9.5%
Media Type/Settings
Canon % Faster/Slower (-)
than HP
The single-page A1 document was scanned with devices left in default mode, with document size set to A1 (Landscape) and colour mode and
resolution option changes as reflected in the table above. Applications were set to save jobs as PDFs on the test PC with auto-naming enabled.
Each test was conducted twice and an average reading reported. Timing was taken from initiation to when the page exited the scanner.
A1 Single Page Scan to Desktop Productivity
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Scan Time (seconds)
Scan Time (seconds)
Black 200 dpi
13.4
35.9
62.7%
Black 400/300 dpi
22.0
42.3
48.0%
Black 600 dpi
29.4
100.9
70.9%
Grey 200 dpi
13.5
31.3
56.9%
Grey 400/300 dpi
25.0
33.9
26.3%
Grey 600 dpi
39.6
67.9
41.7%
Full Colour 200 dpi
28.9
24.9
-16.1%
Full Colour 400/300dpi
52.8
25.7
-105.4%
Full Colour 600 dpi
99.5
66.9
-48.7%
Media Type/Settings
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
The single-page A1 document was scanned with devices left in default mode, with document size set to A1 (Landscape) and colour mode and
resolution option changes as reflected in the table above. Applications were set to save jobs as PDFs on the test PC with auto-naming enabled.
Each test was conducted twice and an average reading reported. Timing taken from initiation to the page being accessible at the desktop.r.
32
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
A0 Single Page Scanning Productivity
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
(time in seconds)
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
(time in seconds)
Scan Time (seconds)
Scan Time (seconds)
Black 200 dpi
17.8
16.3
-9.2%
Black 400/300 dpi
33.4
21.2
-57.5%
Black 600 dpi
48.9
73.0
33.0%
Grey 200 dpi
17.8
16.5
7.9%
Grey 400/300 dpi
33.5
21.5
55.8%
Grey 600 dpi
49.2
72.9
32.5%
Full Colour 200 dpi
49.3
41.0
-20.2%
Full Colour 400/300dpi
95.7
41.0
-133.4%
Full Colour 600 dpi
189.6
114.3
-65.9%
Media Type/Settings
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
The single-page A0 document was scanned with devices left in default mode, with document size set to A0 and colour mode and resolution
option changes as reflected in the table above. Applications were set to save jobs as PDFs on the test PC with auto-naming enabled. Each
test was conducted twice and an average reading reported. Timing was taken from initiation to the page exiting the scanner.
A0 Single Page Scan to Desktop Productivity
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Scan Time (seconds)
Scan Time (seconds)
Black 200 dpi
21.2
66.1
67.9%
Black 400/300 dpi
36.6
76.3
52.0%
Black 600 dpi
53.6
193.3
72.3%
Grey 200 dpi
22.4
54.8
59.1%
Grey 400/300 dpi
45.0
63.8
29.5%
Grey 600 dpi
73.6
151.9
51.5%
Full Colour 200 dpi
53.5
79.7
32.9%
Full Colour 400/300dpi
107.0
85.1
-25.7%
Full Colour 600 dpi
211.4
194.9
-8.5%
Media Type/Settings
Canon % Faster/Slower
(-) than HP
The single-page A0 document was scanned with devices left in default mode, with document size set to A0 and colour mode and resolution
option changes as reflected in the table above. Applications were set to save jobs as PDFs on the test PC with auto-naming enabled. Each
test was conducted twice and an average reading reported. Timing was taken from initiation to the page being accessible at the desktop.
33
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Colour Print Quality
Colour Optical Density Evaluation
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
Plain Paper
Fast
Standard
High
50%
100%
50%
100%
50%
100%
Cyan
0.59
1.06
0.66
1.15
0.64
1.14
Magenta
0.57
0.99
0.63
1.12
0.63
1.14
Yellow
0.46
0.78
0.53
0.88
0.52
0.89
Black
0.57
1.31
0.69
1.44
0.67
1.44
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Plain Paper
Fast
Normal
Best
50%
100%
50%
100%
50%
100%
Cyan
0.39
0.74
0.45
0.85
0.51
0.98
Magenta
0.51
0.83
0.58
0.86
0.60
0.99
Yellow
0.58
0.77
0.65
0.87
0.65
0.99
Black
0.57
1.47
0.62
1.52
0.60
1.39
Note: Colour density readings were assessed by printing an IT8 test file on plain paper in default colour settings at all quality settings available
and measuring the density of 100% dot fill and 50% dot fill using an XRite 508 densitometer.
Colour Gamut Comparisons
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon % larger/smaller
+/- than HP
Plain Paper Fast
196,671
200,555
-1.9%
Plain Paper Standard/Normal
228,330
232,661
-1.9%
Plain Paper High/Best
236,769
248,331
-4.7%
Photo Paper High/Best
624,576
460,023
35.8%
Media Type/Settings
34
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 colour gamut on plain
paper in Fast mode (shown chromatically) versus HP DesignJet
T830 MFP colour gamut (red) on plain paper in Fast mode.
Colour gamut profiles for the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 (left) and HP DesignJet T830 MFP (right) on plain paper in Fast mode.
35
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 colour gamut on plain paper
in Standard mode (shown chromatically) versus HP DesignJet T830
MFP colour gamut (red) on plain paper in Normal mode.
Colour gamut profiles for the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 (left) and HP DesignJet T830 MFP (right) on plain paper in Standard/Normal mode.
36
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 colour gamut on plain paper
in High quality mode (shown chromatically) versus HP DesignJet T830
MFP colour gamut (red) on plain paper in Best quality mode.
Colour gamut profiles for the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 (left) and HP DesignJet T830 MFP (right) on plain paper in High/Best mode.
37
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 colour gamut on photo quality
paper in High quality mode (shown chromatically) versus HP DesignJet
T830 MFP colour gamut (red) on photo quality paper in Best quality
mode.
Colour gamut profiles for the Canon iPF770 MFP L36 (left) and HP DesignJet T830 MFP (right) on photo quality paper in High/Best mode.
38
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Black Print Quality
Solid Density
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Density Block
Fast
Standard
High
Fast
Normal
Best
1
1.32
1.41
1.44
1.53
1.57
1.44
2
1.32
1.38
1.44
1.52
1.56
1.39
3
1.30
1.38
1.43
1.55
1.58
1.47
4
1.31
1.36
1.43
1.55
1.55
1.45
Note: Solid black density measurements are based on four readings taken from a BLI proprietary PDF test target file corresponding to four different 100% solid black locations on the output. The output was assessed at all quality settings available, with the Canon driver set to plain paper/monochrome setting and the HP driver set to plain paper, greyscale, black ink only. Density was measured using an XRite 508 densitometer.
Copy Quality
Solid Density in Draft/Fast mode
Original Target
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Cyan
1.30
0.66
0.98
Magenta
1.36
0.84
0.97
Yellow
0.89
0.76
0.79
Black
1.78
1.23
1.49
Original Target
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Cyan
1.30
0.67
1.05
Magenta
1.36
0.81
1.09
Yellow
0.89
0.81
0.84
Black
1.78
1.20
1.52
Solid Density in Standard/Normal mode
39
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Solid Density in Best mode
Original Target
Canon imagePROGRAF
iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Cyan
1.30
0.68
1.08
Magenta
1.36
0.82
1.19
Yellow
0.89
0.84
0.92
Black
1.78
1.23
1.37
Note: Solid density measurements in various copy modes based on copying a Katun test original containing blocks of all solid colours (based
on an average of two readings for each colour) printed on plain paper. Density was measured using an XRite 508 densitometer.
Colour Fidelity
Media Type/Settings
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
McDonalds
3.4
8.4
Coca Cola Red
18.5
21.4
FedEx Blue
17.9
12.7
Fed Ex Green
4.5
5.2
Microsoft
6.8
3.6
Sun Microsystems
6.3
6.0
Ikea Blue
10.3
12.6
Ikea Yellow
13.4
5.8
Time Fortune 500
18.3
17.2
Quark
4.8
5.1
Versonic
21.4
10.1
T-Mobile Red
12.7
9.8
AVERAGE
11.5
9.8
BLI’s Pantone test chart was used for Image Quality testing, with Best quality settings using 24-bit colour in the case of both models. Delta E
measurements recorded the accuracy with which 12 Pantone colours were reproduced.
Dimensional Accuracy
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Variation in line length in mm
(scanned in landscape)
0.1
0.8
Variation in line length in mm
(scanned in portrait)
0.2
0.9
Dimensional Accuracy was determined using the Applied Images QA-1 Test Chart (150 mm line length) and the Adobe Photoshop Measuring
Tool. Charts were scanned in both Portrait and Landscape mode using the highest resolution available (600 dpi) with both devices set to B&W
mode, and saved as PDF files.
40
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Device Feature Set
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP
L36
User Interface
Advantage
3" (non-touch) LCD

HP DesignJet T830 MFP
4.3" Touchscreen (extended front
panel via a tablet)
Scanner Features
Optical resolution (dpi)
Scanning resolution (dpi)
600
600
200, 400, 600
200, 300, 600
Colour Scanning Speed
2.54 cm (1.0")/sec. (200 dpi);
1.27 cm (0.5")/sec. (400 dpi);
0.84 cm (0.33")/sec. (600 dpi)

Up to 3.81 cm (1.5")/sec.
Black Scanning Speed
7.62 cm (3.0")/sec. (200 dpi);
3.81 cm (1.5")/sec. (400 dpi);
2.54 cm (1.0")/sec. (600 dpi)

Up to 11.43 cm (4.5")/sec.
24-bit RGB Colour, 8-bit Greyscale

24-bit RGB Colour, 8-bit Greyscale,
1-bit Black & White
Scanning Mode
Max. Document Size
965 mm x 15,000

914 mm x 15,000 mm
Max. Scanning Width
914 mm (36")

914 mm (36")
Max. Thickness of Paper (mm)
0.5
Paper Path

Front entry, rear exit
File Save Formats
File Saving Area
Preset Document Types
0.8
Front entry, rear exit
TIFF, JPEG, PDF (Network folder; TIFF only
for USB memory)

TIFF, JPEG, PDF
Network folder, USB memory

Network folder, USB memory, email
None

Line, Mixed, Image
Ability to Save Custom Presets
Yes
Background Removal
No
Preview Scaling
No
Deskew
No
Preview Editing
No
No
Scan Speed Adjustment
No
No
Batch Scanning
No
No
Scan to Email
No
Yes
Auto Paper Size Detection
Yes
Rename and Save
No
Yes

Yes

Yes (Auto)
No

Yes

Yes
Printer Features
Max. print quality
2400 x 1200 dpi
Number of inks
Ink tanks replaceable during operation
Ink-drop size
Ink cartridge capacity
5

4
Yes

No
4 picoliter (all colours)

6 picoliter (all colours)
CMY, Bk, MBK:
130 ml

MBK: 300/69 ml, CMY: 300/130/40 ml
Starter Ink (total)
450 ml

189 ml
Number of nozzles
MBK: 5,120 nozzles, other colours: 2,560
nozzles each; 15,360 in total

9,632 nozzles in total
Number of printheads
Max. paper width
Line accuracy
Minimum line width
41
2400 x 1200 dpi
BuyersLab.com
1 (User-replaceable)
1 (User-replaceable)
914 mm (36")
914 mm (36")
+/-0.1% or less
+/-0.1%
0.02 mm
0.02 mm
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP
L36
Minimum print margins
3 mm
Borderless (0 mm) printing
Number of paper rolls
Maximum outside diameter of roll paper
Maximum cut-sheet media length
Advantage
Yes (via Oversize option)
1
1
150 mm
0.8 mm
Media loading
Optional media handling
5 mm

Yes
100 mm

1.6 m
Maximum media thickness
HP DesignJet T830 MFP

1.676 m
0.3 mm

Top
Top
Roll holder set
36-in Spindle
Standard RAM
256 MB

1 GB
Maximum RAM
256 MB

1 GB
Hard drive
None
Interface
10/100/1000Base-TX, USB 2.0
PDL
Net weight (unpacked)
Power consumption when in standby
None

1000Base-T, Wi-Fi, USB 2.0
GARO, HP-GL/2, HP RTL
HP-GL/2, HP RTL, HP PCL 3, GUI,
JPEG, TIFF, CAL G4, URF
64.6 kg
62.5 kg
0.5 W

Power consumption when active
≤ 140 W

Acoustic pressure, active
48 dB(A)
Acoustic pressure, standby
35 dB(A)
Acoustic power, active
6.5 B(A)
6.5 B(A)
INA
3.4 B(A)
Acoustic power, standby
0.2 W
35 W
48 dB(A)

<16 dB(A)
Driver Feature Set
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770
MFP L36
Speed settings
5 (Fast 300, Fast 600, Standard 600,
High 600 and High 1200)
Economy mode
Yes
Predefined profiles
Overview of profile settings provided
Media profiles
42
Advantage

HP DesignJet T830 MFP
3 (Fast, Normal, Best)
Yes
7 default (Poster, CAD colour,
CAD mono, GIS Perspective, Photo,
Office Document, Faithful Colour
Reproduction)

5 (Default, CAD, GIS, Photo, B/W
Photo)
Yes

No
29 + 5 user-definable

25
IQ optimized for options
Yes
Watermark
Yes
Sharpen text
Yes
Yes (Max detail setting, available in
Best mode)
Thicken fine lines
Yes
Yes (Max detail setting)
BuyersLab.com
Yes

No
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770
MFP L36
Mirror image
Advantage
HP DesignJet T830 MFP
Yes

No
Multi-up printing
Yes, 2 to 16

No
Poster print mode
Yes (2 by 2)

No
Page stamping
Yes (Date, Time, Name, Page Number)

No
Image rotation
Yes – auto 90 or 180 degrees
Yes – by 90 degrees or auto rotate
Yes
Yes
No (there is a link to Status Monitor)
Yes
Option to preview before print
Link to device web server from driver
CMY balance adjustment
Yes

No
Brightness adjustment
Yes

No
Contrast adjustment
Yes

No
Saturation adjustment
Yes

No
Advanced colour management options
Yes
Enlargement Copy Mode
Yes

No
Yes (flexible placement)

Yes (automatic placement)
MS Office Plug-in
Yes

No
Accounting Capability
Yes

No
Disable automatic cutter
Yes
Unidirectional printing
Yes
Integration with MFP
Yes
Free Layout Capability
Yes
Yes

No
Yes
iPF770 MFP L36 also offers PosterArtist Lite as bundled software
Test Environment
TTesting was conducted in BLI’s European test lab, in an atmospherically controlled environment monitored by a
24/7 ExTech RH520 Temperature/RH chart recorder, ensuring that typical office conditions were maintained. All
paper used in testing was allowed to acclimatize inside the facility for a minimum of 12 hours before being used.
Test Equipment
Test equipment: BLI’s dedicated test network in Europe, consisting of Windows 2008 servers, Windows 10 workstations, 10/100/1000BaseTX network switches and CAT5e/6 cabling.
Test Procedures
The test methods and procedures employed by BLI in its lab testing include BLI’s proprietary procedures and
industry-standard test procedures. In addition to a number of proprietary test documents, BLI uses industry standard files including an IT8 test file and an ASTM monochrome test document for evaluating black image quality. In
addition to a visual observation, colour print quality and gamut size is evaluated using a profile software tool from
Colour Confidence that was read using an EFI ES-1000 colour spectrophotometer and analysed using Chromix
ColorThink Pro 3.0 software. Density of black and colour output was measured using an X-Rite 508 densitometer.
43
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Canon imagePROGRAF iPF770 MFP L36 Custom Test Report
vs. HP DesignJet T830 MFP
About Buyers Laboratory LLC
Buyers Laboratory LLC (BLI) is the world’s leading independent provider of analytical information and services to
the digital imaging and document management industry. For more than 50 years, buyers have relied on BLI to help
them differentiate products’ strengths and weaknesses and make the best purchasing decisions, while industry
sales, marketing and product professionals have turned to BLI for insightful competitive intelligence and valued
guidance on product development, competitive positioning and sales channel and marketing support. Using BLI’s
web-based bliQ and Solutions Center services, 40,000 professionals worldwide create extensive side-by-side
comparisons of hardware and software solutions for more than 15,000 products globally, including comprehensive
specifications and the performance results and ratings from BLI’s unparalleled Lab, Solutions and Environmental
Test Reports, the result of months of hands-on evaluation in its US and UK labs. The services, also available via
mobile devices, include a comprehensive library of BLI’s test reports, an image gallery, hard to find manufacturers’
literature and valuable tools for configuring products, calculating total cost of ownership (TCO) and annual power
usage. BLI also offers consulting and private, for-hire testing services that help manufacturers develop and market
better products and consumables.
For more information on Buyers Laboratory, please call David Sweetnam on +44 (0) 118 977 2000, visit
www.buyerslab.com, or email david.sweetnam@buyerslab.com.
44
BuyersLab.com
This report has been reproduced with the written permission of Buyers Laboratory LLC. Any duplication of this report without the written permission of Buyers
Laboratory is unlawful and violators will be prosecuted. ©2016 Buyers Laboratory LLC. To purchase reprints, contact BLI at info@buyerslab.com. • 051606
Download PDF