Topic: An unhappy choice (Read 4776 times)

John Camp · « **on:** October 15, 2007, 03:38:24 pm »

After worrying about it for a while, I went out Friday and bought an Epson 3800, and I have to say that the key factor in the decision is that it'll be easier and cheaper to throw away when better printers come along.

I considered all the three major competitors -- the Canon and the HP and the Epson. Both the Canon and the HP, while in some aspects more desirable than the Epson, seem to be having some long-term mechanical problems that Epson has solved, for no other reason (I suspect) than Epson's longer experience with this type of machine.

The Canon I ruled out fairly early-on. I understand the IQ is brilliant, but the documentation in both set-up and problem-solving seems so poor, and I have so little patience with this kind of thing, that I simply didn't want to deal with it. Also, there's this long overhang in publishing the color-stability estimates. What's up with that?

The HP was my first choice for a long time, but it's been having so many problems showing up lately, like the pizza-wheel thing, that I decided that for $4,000, I'd wait until the next iteration -- especially since I could get a 3800 for a little more than $1,000. I am replacing a 2200, so I also have some experience with Epsons, and the biggest problem with Epsons, head clogging, is something I'm familiar with and can deal with. Also, I went to a local pro photo store, where they have a commercial photo-printing business, and talked to a guy there who prints all day, and he said that in his opinion, the Epson prints were absolutely as good as either the Canon or the HP.

I really wanted a 24-inch printer, though. I don't know exactly why, but that size appeals to me -- 24x36 as opposed to 16x24.

Crap. I hate to make these kinds of compromises. But I think printers are where cameras were about four years ago, when menus were awkward and weird things like banding kept cropping up. Now, the camera hardware/software technology is shaking out, and I think probably the next iteration of printers will be a big step forward in usability and reliability. Maybe Canon will actually hire a guy who knows how to write a manual, and HP will fix its paper handling, and Epson will have bigger printers that don't need a black-ink change...By that time, I'll have gotten a couple years out of the 3800, and can take it down to recycling without feeling too bad about it.

JC

tomrock · « **Reply #1 on:** October 15, 2007, 04:56:48 pm »

Why is this an unhappy choice? Is it the lesser of three evils?

It seems like a good choice to me. I've used Epson prints since the Epson Photo and I've always been happy with the prints. They've definitely gotten better over the years and I'm sure their next ones will be even better.

JeffKohn · « **Reply #2 on:** October 15, 2007, 05:02:32 pm »

I know exactly how you feel, I share your assessment of the current printer market. No printer will give me exactly what I want at a budget I can live with, and some of the models that look very good on paper seem to be having some growing pains if the feedback in the forums is any indication.

Unlike you though, I can't bring myself to spring for the 3800 because even though I would like to be able to print larger than my R2400 allows, the lack of roll support is an absolute deal breaker for me. IMHO this was an incredibly short-sighted and bone-headed move on Epson's part; I know they want to protect the 4800 but they should have at least included basic roll-paper support on the 3800 just like the 2400 has (ie without the paper cutter). IMHO that still wouldn't have cut into 4800 sales from high-volume pros, but would have allowed folks like me to print the occasional pano. Heck I could maybe even live with cutting sheets from rolls if the page length wasn't limited to 37" (I would need at least 49" page length to print 16x48 panos).

If the 4880 addressed the black swap problem to at least the extent of the 3800, that would probably be my purchase, but I print on both types so the 4880 would mean a huge waste of ink. So I guess I'll wait for the next round of printer models to be released...

Tim Gray · « **Reply #3 on:** October 15, 2007, 05:40:36 pm »

Quote

If the 4880 addressed the black swap problem to at least the extent of the 3800, that would probably be my purchase, but I print on both types so the 4880 would mean a huge waste of ink. So I guess I'll wait for the next round of printer models to be released...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146197\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

me too - I hate the ink wasted in my 4000, but I need both matte and glossy, as soon as they have a 4800 "like" printer without swapping I'll buy it, but I don't feel like jumping on the HP or Canon until they have a few more iterations under their collective belts.

rdonson · « **Reply #4 on:** October 15, 2007, 06:07:03 pm »

There is no perfect printer choice available on the market today especially in large format. Its unlikely there will be one for several years, if ever. You have to figure out what you're willing to live with. It sounds like you've made a good decision for your needs.

Fine art printers seem to be exactly where DSLRs are today. The market has several major competitors with one 800 lb gorilla. Canon vs Epson vs HP in printers sounds remarkably like Canon vs Nikon vs Sony vs .... in DLSRs.

The good news is that competition of this nature, while frustrating at times, ultimately benefits the consumer.

IMHO opinion you can make fine large prints with Canon, Epson or HP.

Geoff Wittig · « **Reply #5 on:** October 15, 2007, 09:11:14 pm »

Quote

There is no perfect printer choice available on the market today especially in large format. Its unlikely there will be one for several years, if ever. You have to figure out what you're willing to live with. It sounds like you've made a good decision for your needs.

Fine art printers seem to be exactly where DSLRs are today. The market has several major competitors with one 800 lb gorilla. Canon vs Epson vs HP in printers sounds remarkably like Canon vs Nikon vs Sony vs .... in DLSRs.

The good news is that competition of this nature, while frustrating at times, ultimately benefits the consumer.

IMHO opinion you can make fine large prints with Canon, Epson or HP.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146207\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quite so. There really are no bad choices among the bigger printers. Want a known quantity with long term reliability and lots of 3rd party options? Go for Epson. Want to print on any kind of paper and need the best black & white output possible? Go for the Z3100. Want a bargain on a 17" printer? Put up with Canon's lousy documentation and get a 5000. All of them will give you nicer prints than you could make at any price 3 years ago.

John Camp · « **Reply #6 on:** October 15, 2007, 11:01:45 pm »

Quote

Why is this an unhappy choice? Is it the lesser of three evils?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146195\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Because it's not exactly what I want. Exactly what I want exists, in parts, in three different printers. I'd like a 24-inch printer with good mechanical reliability (no pizza wheels, no paper-feed problems), fairly certain long-term color stability, both matte and glossy blacks, excellent documentation and on-line trouble-shooting, the ability to use a wide gamut of art papers. It all exists, just not in one machine. I think it will in two years, but I need a new printer now.

JC

John_Black · « **Reply #7 on:** October 17, 2007, 02:37:45 am »

I'm hoping Canon's IPF-6100 proves to be that 24" printer, though, the price is higher than what I expected. In 18 months when they start blowing them out at $1899 (just making up a number) to make room for the 6200 or whatever comes next, then I'll genuinely interested. I though Michael's review of the 6100 was due 3 or 4 weeks ago???

marimagen · « **Reply #8 on:** October 17, 2007, 10:18:06 pm »

You know what? I think a bad documentation is not a real deterrent. If Canon has really good printers that don't clog up while you're away on an assignement, you're right to go for it. Almost all printers work the same way so it should not be a problem. Now it feels like Epson printers need a printer-sitter (just like you leave your pets or plants with your neighbours when you go out of town). I've had mine serviced twice because the nozzles just clogged up after I left them unattended for a few weeks. There is no way I'll carry my printer around to the far places I travel to for work. I have an old Epson 2200 and it weighs 10 kilos. I'm going to get a new printer soon, and guess what, I'm going to go for a Canon or an HP!
Marie

tived · « **Reply #9 on:** October 17, 2007, 10:46:14 pm »

Quote

me too - I hate the ink wasted in my 4000, but I need both matte and glossy, as soon as they have a 4800 "like" printer without swapping I'll buy it, but I don't feel like jumping on the HP or Canon until they have a few more iterations under their collective belts.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146203\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Tim,

I may not have understood you correctly, but where or when are you wasting ink on the Epson 4000? On the 4000, you do not have to swap ink's unless empty :-)

I too look for a printer will all the inks present, but with the improved quality of print since the 4000.

Henrik

madmanchan · « **Reply #10 on:** October 18, 2007, 11:19:29 am »

John, out of curiosity, did you also consider the Epson 7880? (you mentioned you wanted a 24" printer)

Author Topic: An unhappy choice (Read 4776 times)