Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Replacing my Epson 2200: Epson R2400, Epson R2880, Epson 3800, HP B9180, or Canon 9500?  (Read 11233 times)

jersey_emt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10

It's time to upgrade my Epson 2200 printer. It's in need of repair, which would not be a cost-effective option. My choices are:

Epson R2400
Epson R2880
Epson 3800
HP B9180
Canon 9500

I would prefer purchasing a new printer but a used one is not out of the question.

I know that the Epson 3800 is a great deal compared to the R2400/R2880 because of the lower ink costs and the fact that you get much more ink from the get-go -- that extra ink in the box bridges the cost between the 13" and 17" Epsons. However, I do not think I make enough prints to warrant splurging for the Epson 3800. The 3800 would definitely be a splurge for me -- if it is the best choice based on what I say below then fine, I will pay the extra money. But the other, cheaper, printers on my list would be much easier on my wallet.

On average, I make 5 prints each week ranging from 8x10 to 13x19. So, about 250 prints per year. However, that usage is not steady. Some weeks I will make 25+ prints, but sometimes I will go a couple of weeks without making a print at all. About 60% of the prints I make are B&W. And about 75% of my prints are on matte paper, so the wasted ink when switching from photo black to matte black on the Epsons is a concern. I do not see myself making any prints larger than 13x19 on a regular basis, so the sole reason I would go for the Epson 3800 would be the lower ink costs and the large amount of free ink that ships with the printer.

I'm leaning towards the HP B9180 because of the larger ink capacity compared to the Epson R2400/R2880 and Canon 9500. I think it's a good compromise between those and the Epson 3800. And from what I have read, the ink cost savings with the Epson 3800 only comes into effect when you make a good deal more prints than what I normally do. And also, from what I have read, the HP B9180 seems to be a better choice for my intermittent usage.

I know that the quality of prints of any of the printers on my list is superb and will be a significant upgrade from my Epson 2200. Based on the information I gave on my printing habits, which printer would you recommend and why?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2008, 09:51:27 pm by jersey_emt »
Logged

Per Ofverbeck

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
    • http://elgfoto.se

Quote from: jersey_emt
It's time to upgrade my Epson 2200 printer. It's in need of repair, which would not be a cost-effective option. My choices are:

Epson R2400
Epson R2880
Epson 3800
HP B9180
Canon 9500

I would prefer purchasing a new printer but a used one is not out of the question.

I know that the Epson 3800 is a great deal compared to the R2400/R2880 because of the lower ink costs and the fact that you get much more ink from the get-go -- that extra ink in the box bridges the cost between the 13" and 17" Epsons. However, I do not think I make enough prints to warrant splurging for the Epson 3800. The 3800 would definitely be a splurge for me -- if it is the best choice based on what I say below then fine, I will pay the extra money. But the other, cheaper, printers on my list would be much easier on my wallet.

On average, I make 5 prints each week ranging from 8x10 to 13x19. So, about 250 prints per year. However, that usage is not steady. Some weeks I will make 25+ prints, but sometimes I will go a couple of weeks without making a print at all. About 60% of the prints I make are B&W. And about 75% of my prints are on matte paper, so the wasted ink when switching from photo black to matte black on the Epsons is a concern. I do not see myself making any prints larger than 13x19 on a regular basis, so the sole reason I would go for the Epson 3800 would be the lower ink costs and the large amount of free ink that ships with the printer.

I'm leaning towards the HP B9180 because of the larger ink capacity compared to the Epson R2400/R2880 and Canon 9500. I think it's a good compromise between those and the Epson 3800. And from what I have read, the ink cost savings with the Epson 3800 only comes into effect when you make a good deal more prints than what I normally do. And also, from what I have read, the HP B9180 seems to be a better choice for my intermittent usage.

I know that the quality of prints of any of the printers on my list is superb and will be a significant upgrade from my Epson 2200. Based on the information I gave on my printing habits, which printer would you recommend and why?

I was confronted with a very similar choice about one year ago: my 2100 (as it´s called here) had to be replaced, the 3800 seemed to be exactly what I needed, except that my printing volume seemed a bit below what would be optimal for it.

After reading lots of tests, I selected a few good image files, burned a CD, and went out to get a demo of the 3800.  After that, there was no looking back; I left the shop in a taxi together with a huge box...

And, so far no problems whatsoever with clogs, stale inks, &c. That printer is there whenever I need it, far fewer cleaning seesions than the 2100, and perfect prints each and every time.  And - I still use the set of ink cartridges that came with it (one is getting a bit low; have to get a spare one ready).

Needless to say, I don´t regret my choice one bit.  Maybe it could be seen as overkill for my needs, but honestly I think not!  And, it actually fits on the same space on my desk that the 2100 occupied.
Logged
Per Ofverbeck
My

sehrich

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
    • http://

I bought the 2400 about a year ago and it works great but wish I had gone for the 3800.  Over the long run I would guess that you will wish you had moved up.  Best of luck
Logged

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8961
    • site

Quote from: Per Ofverbeck
I was confronted with a very similar choice about one year ago: my 2100 (as it´s called here) had to be replaced, the 3800 seemed to be exactly what I needed, except that my printing volume seemed a bit below what would be optimal for it.

After reading lots of tests, I selected a few good image files, burned a CD, and went out to get a demo of the 3800.  After that, there was no looking back; I left the shop in a taxi together with a huge box...

And, so far no problems whatsoever with clogs, stale inks, &c. That printer is there whenever I need it, far fewer cleaning seesions than the 2100, and perfect prints each and every time.  And - I still use the set of ink cartridges that came with it (one is getting a bit low; have to get a spare one ready).

Needless to say, I don´t regret my choice one bit.  Maybe it could be seen as overkill for my needs, but honestly I think not!  And, it actually fits on the same space on my desk that the 2100 occupied.
I'm in a very similar position: fairly low volume, fairly lengthy periods with no use, no problems when I use it and beautiful output. It's remarkably small and very quiet in operation. It's no speed demon and you wouldn't want it for big jobs, but that's not its intended market anyway. I'd recommend it.

Jeremy
Logged

seanw

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34

My usage sounds similar to yours - printing several hundred prints a year and at times, not printing for a fairly long period. So far my 3800 has worked flawlessly. No problems and no clogs. For a 17" wide printer, it's pretty small too.
A friend has the 2400 and the inks run out very quickly. The quality of the prints is identical but the ink cost is a lot higher with the 2400. The 3800 really is not much more considering the ink you get with the printer. Keep in mind 15-20% of the ink will be lost with the initial priming, but regardless, you will get a lot of prints out of the first cartridges.
Good luck in your decision.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2008, 01:00:09 pm by seanw »
Logged

bill t.

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3011
    • http://www.unit16.net

At 250 13x19's a year, the break even point for a 2400/3800 pair would come sooner than a year.  Roughly.

Don't underestimate the value of big prints.   I was once happy with my 2200, but my sales skyrocketed when I started to offer 24 x 36+ prints of the same subjects.
Logged

jersey_emt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and opinions. Based on what you have said, plus additional research of my own, I've narrowed down my choices to between the Epson 3800 and the HP B9180. I know that with the Epson 3800 I will recover the extra cost of the printer over the Epson R2880 in not too much time, but the HP B9180 can be had brand new for under $550 -- an extremely attractive price. I also would be printing B&W on both matte and glossy papers, so the B9180 is also attractive due to not having to waste ink switching from photo black to matte black and vice-versa. I know that the Epson 3800 wastes much less ink than other Epsons, but there still is wasted ink (5.5mL for the 'round trip' from glossy to matte and back to glossy from what I have read).

I am a bit weary of purchasing an Epson 3800 (especially a new one) because it would seem that this printer is due for an upgrade in the near future. If, say, the 3880 or 3900 is announced and released soon, I would probably look to snag a clearance deal on a 3800. I would be pretty upset if I spent over $1000 on a new Epson 3800, only to have it go on clearance for something like $800-$900 when its replacement is released.

I need a printer very soon, as I am unable to print at the moment. I'm thinking of finding a used B9180 in excellent shape and use that while waiting for the replacement for the Epson 3800. I could then sell the B9180 -- if I buy a used one, I should be able to sell it a few months later for not much less than what I would pay for it used -- and purchase either the 3800 at a clearance price, or its replacement, depending on how much of an upgrade it actually is.

What do you think of this plan (buying an HP B9180 immediately while waiting for the replacement for the Epson 3800 to be released)?

Thanks again everyone.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2008, 03:12:15 pm by jersey_emt »
Logged

Per Ofverbeck

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
    • http://elgfoto.se

Quote from: jersey_emt
....I am a bit weary of purchasing an Epson 3800 (especially a new one) because it would seem that this printer is due for an upgrade in the near future. If, say, the 3880 or 3900 is announced and released soon, I would probably look to snag a clearance deal on a 3800. I would be pretty upset if I spent over $1000 on a new Epson 3800, only to have it go on clearance for something like $800-$900 when its replacement is released.

I need a printer very soon, as I am unable to print at the moment. I'm thinking of finding a used B9180 in excellent shape and use that while waiting for the replacement for the Epson 3800. I could then sell the B9180 -- if I buy a used one, I should be able to sell it a few months later for not much less than what I would pay for it used -- and purchase either the 3800 at a clearance price, or its replacement, depending on how much of an upgrade it actually is.
....

OK, for fear of paying $100 - 200 more now, you´re ready to: 1) Buy, then sell an entirely different printer with the inevitable losses of market value and unused supplies, and, 2) Go through the time and material consuming process of learning and calibrating two printers instead of one, in just a few months´ time.

I can´t see the economy.  If you need a printer right NOW, buy the one you want NOW.  Learn it, use it, and stop even reading rumours of future replacements...
Logged
Per Ofverbeck
My

NigelC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 583

Quote from: jersey_emt
It's time to upgrade my Epson 2200 printer. It's in need of repair, which would not be a cost-effective option. My choices are:

Epson R2400
Epson R2880
Epson 3800
HP B9180
Canon 9500

I would prefer purchasing a new printer but a used one is not out of the question.

I know that the Epson 3800 is a great deal compared to the R2400/R2880 because of the lower ink costs and the fact that you get much more ink from the get-go -- that extra ink in the box bridges the cost between the 13" and 17" Epsons. However, I do not think I make enough prints to warrant splurging for the Epson 3800. The 3800 would definitely be a splurge for me -- if it is the best choice based on what I say below then fine, I will pay the extra money. But the other, cheaper, printers on my list would be much easier on my wallet.

On average, I make 5 prints each week ranging from 8x10 to 13x19. So, about 250 prints per year. However, that usage is not steady. Some weeks I will make 25+ prints, but sometimes I will go a couple of weeks without making a print at all. About 60% of the prints I make are B&W. And about 75% of my prints are on matte paper, so the wasted ink when switching from photo black to matte black on the Epsons is a concern. I do not see myself making any prints larger than 13x19 on a regular basis, so the sole reason I would go for the Epson 3800 would be the lower ink costs and the large amount of free ink that ships with the printer.

I'm leaning towards the HP B9180 because of the larger ink capacity compared to the Epson R2400/R2880 and Canon 9500. I think it's a good compromise between those and the Epson 3800. And from what I have read, the ink cost savings with the Epson 3800 only comes into effect when you make a good deal more prints than what I normally do. And also, from what I have read, the HP B9180 seems to be a better choice for my intermittent usage.

I know that the quality of prints of any of the printers on my list is superb and will be a significant upgrade from my Epson 2200. Based on the information I gave on my printing habits, which printer would you recommend and why?

I had a similiar dilemma, and similiarly small/erratic ouput but also a further issue of the footprint (escuse pun) of the printer in a domestic setting. BTW, I discounted Canon 9500 because of the huge margins it leaves on fine art paper. I had a good look at the output from the 3800 alongside the HP B9180 - can't explain it just preferred 3800 - also 3800 is physically no bigger in spite of A2 output. Got a good deal on 3800 and no regrets
Logged

GregW

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 306
    • http://

Another vote for the 3800 from a low volume printer.

Everyone of course has different views but here are some intangible benefits from my perspective.

I've found that the 3800 community is quite big. There is a huge amount of information out there on how to get the best out of this printer.

The ICC Profiles for the Epson 3800 Advanced B&W Photo Driver AWB ICC profiles from Eric Chan are simply invaluable. I'm sure they have saved me a lot; in both in time and ink.

His Epson 3800: Printer Notes and Resources are also a great help in getting up and running with the minimum of fuss and mistakes.

It's hard to put a financial value on this type of support but I'm confident in saying that are many LL members with 3800's have found his help and advice very useful.

Regarding ink swapping. Have you tried the digital 'Baryta' papers like Ilford galerie gold fibre silk 310g/m2  and Harman Gloss FB AL 320g/m2 (my personal favorite).  I feel the DMAX combined with the touch and feel of these papers is very exciting, particually for B&W. Until then I was very keen on Hahnemühle's photo rag 308g/m2. This is a highly subjective opinion, your experience might well be different.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2008, 01:13:55 pm by GregW »
Logged

jersey_emt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10

Thanks again everyone for your valuable input. It seems that the Epson 3800 is very highly regarded here and has some extremely vocal supporters. Unfortunately for those supporters, after pricing & bartering both the 3800 and the B9180 at local retailers, the best price I received for the B9180 was less than half of that of the 3800, and I was unable to justify the extra cost. I did some calculations and it would take far to long to recover the extra costs based on my projected usage. I just couldn't do it.

I picked up a new B9180 from a local retailer last night, and will be setting it up tonight.

Thanks again for your input.
Logged

jersey_emt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10

I've set up my new B9180 and have made several prints, both B&W and color. I am quite impressed -- it is a noticeable increase in quality over my old Epson 2200. I am very satisfied with my new printer and I feel I made the best choice for me.
Logged

Downtown Pearl

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2

Absolute thumbs up on the epson 3800.  i went from a canon 1990 to an epson 2400 then spring of this year got a 3800 for my special large prints.  I love this printer.  Crisp, clear, color, and gorgeous black and white.   might cost a bit more but if you're serious about your photography then you want to be able to know the printer is going to deliver as you intend.


Downtown Pearl
www.downtownpearl.com
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

I've owned all the Epson's in your list. The 3800 without a doubt is the printer I'd suggest. Its the one I use now most often. Not that much larger than the 2400, superb quality, big ink carts. A real workhorse. Love that I can run it on a network too.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".
Pages: [1]   Go Up