Am I asking for a new headache by buying a used HP Z3100?

[randal21]

My touchy, trusty old 7900 seems to be putting out less yellow judging from my nozzle checks. Even with cleanings and Windex soaks its not any better. I have a chance to buy a used HP Z3100 and was excited that when a colors head is bad it's not like a $2000 Epson head fix which can happen again. I print mainly on Epson Matte presentation paper and was wondering if others had great results with matte paper printing. Also, I read where the reds can be disappointing and maybe even the blues move towards violet. If the above concerns are a concern I will go back to a trusty Epson 7800. Any feedback and suggestions would be appreciated. 

[Ernst Dinkla]

With the capacity of the ink carts and speed in mind you could also consider a Canon iPF model if there is enough work for it. I guess it will be halfway in costs (Epson<>HP) when the Canon heads fail and they are user replaceable too. If the volume you print is not worth it then consider the Z3200 either new or refurbished. In three weeks we also know whether Photokina 2014 changed the market in wide format printers. Although I do not expect that.


--
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
April 2014, 600+ inkjet media white spectral plots.

[randal21]

I have an opportunity to get a Z3100 and can"t afford a new printer. Was asking for more feedback on the Z3100 and it's printing results/etc before I commit.  thanks

[Damir]

I still use Z 3100 with great satisfaction. Printer have some small quirks, especially if you use it for printing on matte papers. It needs periodical cleaning of buld up ink. Also consider that this printer have problem with rubber belt that need to be changed every 5 - 6 years. Check if unit you consider have new belt or still use the original one.

Other than that Z 3100 is a great printer, I never ever had any problem with red or blue. I have Epson 9800 also, Z 3100 have better reds, beter color fidelity as a matter of fact, especially on matte paper. I print mostly matte paper on my Z 3100, 90 % of work is on Matte Litho Realistic.

On the other hand I like Epson print on plastic photo paper much more than on HP it looks more natural, more like traditional photo.

[randal21]

Thanks Damir. You restore my confidence in buying the Z3100. I print 100% on Epson Somerset Velvet rag or Ultra Premium Presentation and it will be a problem if I can't use the paper any more or my old proofs I did for artists I print for aren't really close to what my Epson 7800/7900 did. Think I will have to switch brands of papers? Thanks so much for the feedback and sharing.

[John Caldwell]

If you mentioned the price on the used Z3100 you're considering I missed it. I cannot imagine paying more than $500 dollars for a machine of that lineage. Even then, I wouldn't do it without quite  a bit of time on my hands. Others will feel differently., I understand.

I upgrade from the Z3200 to Epson 900 series machine two years ago, feeling the Z3200 had lost HP's allegiance at that time. I would not have accepted a Z3100 for free as of that date.

My bias is these companies make you pay, one way or another, for not running current OS and hardware. The machine hardware cost just isn't where the time and money go, in my experience.

John Caldwell

[Damir]

John

You may have right regarding OS compatibility, this have to be additionally explored.

As a matter of fact I still run my Z3100 on Windows XP. My Z is connected to computer that I use only for printing. On that machine there are only software for printing, nothing else. It works perfect all of the time therefore I never consider to upgrade it, I just upgrade software that I use.

Anyway this is still wining combination, photographers that want high quality prints on matte paper are moving to me from printing services with new Canon and Epson printers. Recently I have situation in which one of my acquaintance, well known graphic designer, and less known photographer ask me to print some photos. He performed test, although I didn't know it at that time. He gave same 3 pictures to printing service with new Canon machine, new Epson machine and to me. Later he admitted that he did not consider me seriously as I have old printer which he consider outdated, but somehow he decided to give me a chance as I help him to organize his first photography exhibition. He was astonished by quality of prints, and decided to print entire exhibition on my Z. When I saw the prints from other services I was surpriseed with lack of fine details, color cast and low contrast. It may be that they do not operate their printers in correct manner, but they are experienced professionals, so I wonder how it happened.

I have seen many times prints from other machines and I always like my Z print more than any other if they are on matte paper, and especially if they are black and white. This machine may be slow, may have some quirks, may lack proper support but in my opinion it is still printer that make top quality prints. As I already mentioned I like Epson prints more than that of my Z when they are made on photo paper.

I also need to mention fact that I use Z for making profiles for all other printers that I use. If one day Z stop printing I will keep it as machine for calibration if he continue to work that way.

[Geraldo Garcia]

Nothing against the Z3100, the Z3xxx printers are fantastic and I will use my Z3200 until it dies.
Anyone who claims there is a clear advantage of image quality from one model over the other is trying to sell you something or was fooled by someone who did. The top printers from Canon, HP and Epson are all excellent from the image quality point of view, with some small advantages from one model to the other on very specific scenarios. Knowing the equipment and taking full advantage of it's characteristics is more likely to be the key factor on the quality of the final product.
That said, I would hesitate to accept such an old printer.  Maybe for free or almost free I would take it, but never as my only printer.