4900 or 7900

[Mike Guilbault]

Ok, I've got my name in on a 4900 but now that I'm having to wait for my printer, I'm considering the 7900.  I realize it costs more AND prints larger, and weights more, but other than that, are there any differences that I should be aware of?

For example, can I make small prints as easy on the 7900 as the 4900?  I know it will go to a max of 24", but is there a minimum? Is there a cost difference between the two (not taking the printer cost into consideration) to print a particular sized image, lets say an 8x10? What are the advantages of the three ink cartridge sizes of the 7900?

[Randy Carone]

Ink cost for the 79/9900 is $.51/ml (150ml cart), $.36/ml (350ml) and down to $.31/ml (700ml). The 4900 has a UMAP (Unilateral Minimum Resale Price) of $.43/ml for the 200ml cart, which is the only size available. Both printers use an average of 1.5ml total ink per square foot for full coverage. The 79/9900 series ships with 110ml starter cartridges and the 4900 with 80ml carts.

[abiggs]

If you primarily print on cut sheets, stick with the 4900. If you primarily print on rolls, do the 7900 or 9900. I don't know what the minimum sheet size is on the 7900, but you can only load 1 sheet at a time on the 7900. I have both the 4900 and the 9900, and they are different animals.

[Mike Guilbault]

Thanks Randy... that helps.  I hadn't found stats on the /ml ink prices.  From what I understand, you can also 'mix' cartridge sizes in the 7900 which may be an advantage for me since I'm not high volume and could use the smaller sizes for ink that may not be replaced as often as others.

Andy... since I'm not high volume, the one sheet at a time shouldn't be much of a problem.  But since I can't afford the 9900, I'm thinking that the 7900 may be a good compromise to having both.  Since you say that 'they are different animals', would you mind elaborating a little on that?  Unless you're needing to stack single sheets, why would you use the 4900 over the 9900?

[stefano]

Mike,

as I was waiting for my 4900 I went thought the same train of thought as you. In the end what kept me with the 4900 was the fact that I did not see myself printing a lot of larger than 16x24" (unless I were to get into canvas, in which case I might want to go larger than 24"). That combined with the extra cost, and especially the larger size, discouraged me from a 7900. Also, i like the idea of a fully flat paper path for printing on alternative media, especially inkaid coated metal. I don't think the 7900 can do that, and I am intrigued by the idea.

My volume is quite small also, so the larger volume potential of a 24" printer with a RIP was not an issue.

Overall I am very happy with my choice - The 4900 is an awesome printer!

Stefano

[Mike Guilbault]

You make a good argument Stefano.  I'd like to print canvases (sold two 30x40s recently) so I'm hesitant to purchase the 7900 when I may end up needing the 9900 and having the 7900 would be redundant - I think. So the 4900 to start may be a good decision and if things progress well enough, then make the jump to the 9900 as Andy mentions and keep the 4900 for smaller projects.

[Luca Ragogna]

I looked at the 7900 too, but IMO it's both too small and too big. 8.5x11 is the smallest sheet it can run and you have to load 1 sheet at a time. The biggest canvas you can run is 18 x whatever (you need 3" on each side for wrap). I think the 7900 is best suited as a proofing machine for the commercial print market since you can run an 8 up proof on a 24" roll.

I ended up with the 9890 and a 2880. The 2880 handles anything under 11x14 and the 9890 handles the bigger stuff and large orders that I can gang up. It's a combo that works really well. I think you should get the 4900 or even a 4880 and send your canvases out to me 

Seriously, a printer that can feed sheets from a tray should come first. If you try to print everything with a roll fed printer you'll drive yourself crazy.

[Luca Ragogna]

... Also, i like the idea of a fully flat paper path for printing on alternative media, especially inkaid coated metal. I don't think the 7900 can do that, and I am intrigued by the idea.

The X900/X890 printers all have a straight though paper path. I find it's easier to load ultra heavy or alternative media in them versus one of the smaller printers.

[Mike Guilbault]

I think I'll stick with the 4900 for now then.  If (when) I need larger I can always call Luca ( )or get the 9900 then - or whatever the model is at the time.

Thanks guys!

[stefano]

The X900/X890 printers all have a straight though paper path. I find it's easier to load ultra heavy or alternative media in them versus one of the smaller printers.

Luca is correct, I had misconstrued the paper path of the 7/9900. I have had good success with teh single sheet feed in the 4900, so if the 7/9900 are any easier they should be great for heavy media also! Anyway, I am very happy with the 4900, at least until my printing volume gets up to the point of justifying a 9900!

Stefano