Epson at Photokina? Any movement (from anyone) on 17" printers?

[Dan Wells]

    There had been rumors of a whole bunch of new Epsons coming at Photokina, including perhaps two new 17" models... Right now, the 17" printer market seems pretty static, and the rebates and discounts aren't even all that good. Canon seems to have abandoned 17" entirely, although they technically still sell the iPF5100, it's now two generations behind the rest of their line. Epson has the 3880 (which uses an old inkset) and the 4900 (which seems to be the only truly modern 17" photo printer on the market, but it's huge - no lighter than the iPF6300, although a different shape).

   I need a 17" printer primarily for sheet-fed printing, which is a huge pain on anything larger - doing a run of greeting cards or even 8x10 prints on an iPF anything or a 7900 is a massive exercise in frustration. I'd love to have roll capability as well, because I'm too mobile for a 24" or 44" printer right now (I've had them before, and will again when my life settles down). I like the 4900 except for the size, although I think I could manage it - it fits in the trunk of a regular car pretty easily, doesn't it? The 3880 (under 50 lbs, and relatively compact when folded up) is probably a better fit for how much I'm moving around right now, but the three year old inkset makes me hesitate (and I wish that 17x25" sheets were more common, because I like 16x24 as a print size).

   I missed the rebates this spring that allowed a 4900 for $1100ish, and the best deals I see now are ~$850 for a 3880 (after rebate) and ~$1500 for a 4900. If I saw a 3880 closer to $650-$700 after everything, I'd jump on it (it would be worth it for smaller prints alone (the last bit of gamut doesn't matter as much on greeting cards or even runs of $35 8x10s), even when I own a roll printer again). A $1100 4900 would be very tempting as well, because it could put off needing to find the space for a really big printer for a while - I could send out the occasional 24x36, and the 4900 does 16x24s from rolls, and with state of the art gamut. If only the "3900" existed, it would be the perfect printer for my current needs (other than the lack of 17x25" paper).

                                                

                                                                       -Dan

[John Caldwell]

I would pass on the 4900 if the intent is sheet-fed heavy stock that obligates use of the rear slot. When I found I needed to nurture each and every sheet of William Turner, BFK Rives, and the like, to get the sheet into our 4900's transport I called Epson. I was hoping they'd point to an adjustment that could be improved, but instead they agreed there was an issue with the 4900's rear path and heavy media.

If you don't need the rear path for what you're doing, I think you'll be OK from what I can tell.

Others here use the 4900, so see what they report.

John Caldwell

[Dan Wells]

Is the 3880 better at handling heavier sheets?

[John Caldwell]

Can't answer.

[Randy Carone]

I've had no problems feeding heavy stock in the Rear Feed on my 3800, which is three+ years old.

[elolaugesen]

my old and now worn out 3800 (must be )work like a charm both rear and front feeder..     

getting older like we all do    but we (including the 3800) still get the job done.

cheers elo

[Alan Goldhammer]

I have no problem with the rear feed on the 3880 and it's really the only feeder I use except for note cards since all my paper choices are heavy weights.

[Varka]

We run 60lb heavy matte paper through our 4900 both in rolls and sheets, with no problems.

I've never needed to use the rear paper path though, but it's important to note that you can't print borderless on sheet-fed paper - only rolls, as it trims the excess off the top and bottom of the roll, which naturally it can't do with sheet fed media. This means you have to get the guillotine out every time you want to print something borderless... which gets old, fast.

I wouldn't want to transport a 4900 around unless I absolutely had to, especially without its huge shipping box (4ft cube), and I most certainly wouldn't want to do so on my own or without a truck.

Regarding ink sets, I think you would do well to request sample prints from Epson from each - or ask someone who owns both to print you out a test print with the right settings etc to compare.

Unless you're printing stuff that has really extreme color gamut (most of the stuff we print comes from Photoshop artists who have no idea that printers can't produce every color they see on screen), I would recommend going with the 'sensible choice' of the 3880. It is extremely unlikely that anyone other than yourself is even going to be aware, in a side by side comparison, that there's a difference in gamut.

The 4900 is a workhorse designed to print and print and print - and is inconvenient for flexibility, portability, and infrequent use as a result. We paid the extra because we needed something that would run hundreds of prints a day for a long, long time, and thus didn't mind that we'd need a humidifier in the room at all times, three people to move it, and an entire desk just to house the printer.

The 3880 is more of a prosumer-grade machine; you'll get a ton of flexibility (eg borderless, 50lbs weight, cheaper price) but it won't be as useful for huge runs. Based on your analysis so far (remember to include ink pricing, especially third party ones from inkjetmall and the like!), I would recommend the 3880 if you value your sanity and expect to need that flexibility.

Hope this helps.

[pluton]

I've had my 3800 for about 3.75 years, and the rear feed is the definition of the word unreliable.  You mean there actually are trouble-free units out there in the world?
Next printer, I'll test the rear feed immediately on arrival, not many months later when the dealer/Epson can wriggle out of replacing the unit.