Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Marks sc p5000 review  (Read 1343 times)

montylparker

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6
Marks sc p5000 review
« on: June 12, 2017, 10:22:18 PM »

First let me say it seems to me a lot of effort was put forth on this review and I thank Mark and LL for it. I have a question regarding ...."The customer for an Epson SC-P5000 printer prints regularly; the printer is designed for a production environment, and not ideal that it sits unused for weeks at a time; for those who print infrequently, the SC-P800 would be preferable" ....., what specifically differs in these two printers that renders the 800 better able to sit longer without clogging. Is there proof for this ?  Does the 5000 have the same ink clog rejecting surfaces present in the 800 and if not - why not ? It would seem to me that if the 800 is preferable there must be a reasoned explanation.

 Thanks in advance for any illumination.....
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10397
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2017, 11:02:01 PM »

Epson America provided this advice to me and I passed it on in the review, because it comes from the one source that really knows these machines in both design and operational detail. Epson does not enter into discussion of design detail with outside parties, so no, there are no reasons from source and no proof. That said, we do know from numerous reports of anecdotal operational experience with the 3880 and the 4900 that on the whole 3880 clogging is a whole lot less than that for insufficiently operated 4900s. The P800 is very similar to the 3880, but my on-going experience with it, and that of some others, suggests it is not quite as clog resistant as the 3800/3880. The 5000 is too new to have a satisfactory track record of user experience, but there are design differences noted in my review which suggest that it should outperform the 4900 in this respect. There are a number of factors affecting clogging so I shall not speculate about what differentiates these models in that regard.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

NigelC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 553
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2017, 08:40:41 AM »

FWIW, I replaced my 3800 with a P800 about 9 months ago and for various reasons I've had very few opportunities to do much printing. I leave it switched off and every few weeks do a nozzle check and sometimes make a test print. I've had no clogs whatsoever. Caveat - domestic temperature and humidity is moderate.
Logged

Rand47

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1099
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2017, 02:29:58 PM »

FWIW, I replaced my 3800 with a P800 about 9 months ago and for various reasons I've had very few opportunities to do much printing. I leave it switched off and every few weeks do a nozzle check and sometimes make a test print. I've had no clogs whatsoever. Caveat - domestic temperature and humidity is moderate.

Same here w/ my SC P600.  Have not had to do a nozzle cleaning yet at all since new.  And, while too early to tell, really, have had only one problem w/ my SC P5000 and that was when the PK starter cart was very low.  On every other Epson printer I've owned you could run the carts until the printer stopped printing "mid-print" and replace the cart.  On the 5000 I got what looked like a clogged PK.  A couple of pair-cleanings did nothing.  Since the cart was very low on the status monitor, I went ahead and put a new cart in, did a cleaning, and voila!  No further issues at all since the swap out.

I should add that I'm not a high volume printer.  I make sure the P5000 gets at least one "something" run through it every week, though.  Often times I'll be busy for several days in a row, then nothing for a bit.  Therefore, I'm not Epson's "exact target" for this printer, but am impressed so far.  My old 4880 was difficult to keep completely free and often required some pretty extensive cleaning to keep it up and running.

Rand
Logged
Rand Scott Adams

foxhole510

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2017, 10:22:05 AM »

Kudos to Mark Segal for such a comprehensive review. I am using the P5000 for over a month-not a single clog yet-probably due to three factors:1 ink repellent coating on the print head 2. new preventative dust seals and 3. ink less nozzles checks. The P800 and P5000 use the same ink formulation however the P5000 in addition uses orange and green ink cartridges which help expand the color gamut. The 5000 looks, weighs and takes up the same space as the 4900. In comparison the p800 is smaller, lighter and ultimately easier to move around. Both printers put out wonderful prints. If you do a lot of printing via the the roll feed I think the powered roll feed on the  P5000 might have the edge. I did notice some gloss differential with the P5000 on Luster paper and wonder what Mark thinks. Perhaps its due to the denser black ink. Anyway both printer deliver very beautiful prints. S
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10397
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2017, 10:38:31 AM »

Hi foxhole510, glad you liked the review, and interesting experience on the non-clogs; that's good. Gloss differential isn't something I'm very sensitive to because seeing it requires looking at the prints at unnatural angles, and would depend on the specific paper and lighting. Just a quick check with Hahn Photo Rag Baryta for example, if I hold the paper at an angle that doesn't allow me to see the photo properly, only on "pure white" do I see slight evidence of it, so nothing that would concern me in the least.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

foxhole510

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2017, 11:29:36 AM »

Of note on the P5000 when a cartridge gets low on ink the large orange alert light starts flashing and the effect of this is two fold. Since we all know there is ink left in the cartridge you either ignore the alert light flashing and continue on to make prints or you replace the cartridge and waste the remaining ink but the alert light finally goes off.

Also annoying on the misnamed rear paper feed ( really found on top of the printer) is the flimsy and ineffectively short telescoping back paper support that allows 17x22 inch paper to flop backwards towards the rear of the printer. On the P800 the rear paper feed has a wonderful firm and tall telescoping paper support.
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10397
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2017, 11:36:38 AM »

Of note on the P5000 when a cartridge gets low on ink the large orange alert light starts flashing and the effect of this is two fold. Since we all know there is ink left in the cartridge you either ignore the alert light flashing and continue on to make prints or you replace the cartridge and waste the remaining ink but the alert light finally goes off.

Also annoying on the misnamed rear paper feed ( really found on top of the printer) is the flimsy and ineffectively short telescoping back paper support that allows 17x22 inch paper to flop backwards towards the rear of the printer. On the P800 the rear paper feed has a wonderful firm and tall telescoping paper support.

Strange - I have three low ink warnings flashing on the LCD panel, which one simply ignores, but the large orange light above the LCD panel (if that's what you mean) certainly does not flash for this. Are you sure by coincidence there isn't something else going on causing that light to flash? Normally, when it flashes, you can't print until the issue it is flagging is dealt with. As usual with Epson printers, for low-ink warnings, just keep printing until they are declared empty and need replacing.

As for the plastic support on back of the top paper feed - it doesn't matter that the paper flaps backward. The way that feed is designed, once you push the paper downward as instructed on the LCD, it is "grabbed" and the feed mechanism takes over. It won't cause issues.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml

foxhole510

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #8 on: July 04, 2017, 12:18:16 PM »

I am glad Mark isn't bothered by the noticeable gloss differential on Luster/gloss papers and says that you would have to be looking at prints from unusual angles to see it. He's correct to say it isn't noticed when looking at a print from dead center but not all prints are viewed from center as in crowded galleries.Sadly gloss differential does reveal the weakness in a printer not being able to uniformly coat an image and hopefully manufacturers aren't given a pass to not improve on this problem. Epson acknowledges gloss differential as an issue and strives to correct for it. In one printer they included an extra cartridge called the gloss optimizer to remedy the problem.
 
Mark also gave Epson a pass on the poorly designed and constructed rear paper support that lets paper flop backwards because the back support doesn't telescope high enough. He is right that the paper feed still works but I find this an excuse for a poor design which should be improved on.  Epson should correct it and give us a similar rear back paper support as they put on the P800.
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10397
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Marks sc p5000 review
« Reply #9 on: July 04, 2017, 12:34:45 PM »

I am glad Mark isn't bothered by the noticeable gloss differential on Luster/gloss papers and says that you would have to be looking at prints from unusual angles to see it. He's correct to say it isn't noticed when looking at a print from dead center but not all prints are viewed from center as in crowded galleries.Sadly gloss differential does reveal the weakness in a printer not being able to uniformly coat an image and hopefully manufacturers aren't given a pass to not improve on this problem. Epson acknowledges gloss differential as an issue and strives to correct for it. In one printer they included an extra cartridge called the gloss optimizer to remedy the problem.
 
Mark also gave Epson a pass on the poorly designed and constructed rear paper support that lets paper flop backwards because the back support doesn't telescope high enough. He is right that the paper feed still works but I find this an excuse for a poor design which should be improved on.  Epson should correct it and give us a similar rear back paper support as they put on the P800.

On the gloss differential business I maintain my position based on what I see. What I see depends on the kind of paper and the angle of view. On a textured luster paper such effects would be far less evident than on a smooth semi-gloss or finely textured luster, but this also depends on the photo. For smooth or smoothish papers, viewing the print at an angle unusual enough not to be able to appreciate the photo, one may notice some in non-inked areas looking hard enough for it. On the more heavily textured luster papers such as Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Baryta, I just don't see it, either from the Canon or the Epson printers I've been testing lately. It isn't for me to give manufacturers a "pass" - I just report what I see, my vision is pretty good and I've been examining prints over decades....

Turning to the paper support for the SC-P5000, again, sorry, but in my humble opinion, this is a non-issue. You may have noticed that if the paper is flexible enough to bend backwards, it may rest on the roll holder cover behind the paper support; otherwise it may just bend backward a bit. That's fine. I have yet to load a sheet into that printer (and I've loaded plenty of different characteristics) that is the least bit affected by the paper support arrangement. The day it fails to pull the paper through correctly on account of this construct, I'll let you know. Again, not an issue of giving manufacturers a "pass". I simply report my findings.

You don't agree with them, that's fine. You are of course entitled.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: [1]   Go Up