Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: JamesBlonde on January 21, 2019, 12:38:51 pm
-
Hi all :) I've asked this question on a different forum, but was pointed in this general direction by one of the locals, so thought I'd ask here!
What printers would you suggest for someone who wants to print A2 and above in a panoramic format and sell? The largest prints I've sold to date have a maximum width of 16.5" / A2, but may wish to go larger in the future. Just to add to this, I also shoot infrared and generally convert to black & white, so I'm not just looking at excellent colour performance, but also B&W. I'd like it to take cut sheets as well as roll if possible. This would be my first grown up printer, and I understand I'll need to learn a fair amount to get the best out of it, but print labs just aren't an option any more after one too many faulty orders.
This started with someone locally offering a Canon IPF8000 for £350, though I've since found out it needs all 12 inks, at least 1 head, a maintenance cartridge, and I couldn't find native Windows 10 drivers. (He thought it was an IFP8100 labelled as an 8000, which might have been worth further consideration as at least drivers exist, but that was based on his belief that the 8000 was a 6 colour printer and his was a 12 colour printer. I think he saw the 8000S and got confused perhaps). I'm thinking that's not as good a deal as I originally thought, and am now looking at other options.
I like the idea of larger format printers, mostly because it doesn't size restrict me, but I'm aware of the potential expense after looking into the IPF8100, and the need to use it regularly. Having said that, I don't want to be paying out for ink after 20 prints, as seems to be the case with the desktop printers I've used in the past (and then not used cos they're just expensive to run), so larger ink capacity options is a bonus.
I don't have a limitless budget, but I think I'd realised I could be spending in the couple of thousand price range, with a possible need for more for consumables. I would happily pay less, but possibly a bit more if it's genuinely worth it. I need to be conscious about size / space (the IPF8100 just planted the seed of in idea - I hadn't actually figured out where to put it yet!) so something more compact would obviously be a bonus. I'm also aware that some printers need cartridge changes for different papers / print types which wastes ink. I'd like to avoid that, but it's possibly not a showstopper - as long as I know.
Used is an option, so could be interested in vague ideas on used prices, but I don't want used to mean "this is on its last legs, the wheels are falling off, the head(s) are dead and the main board is likely to fry"
I have a "great idea" of offering my print services locally to help subsidise this. This is of course silly, and it'll never happen, but if any of your suggested printers would allow for this, do please let me know!
Epson SC-P800 is probably the front runner at the moment, but other ideas / suggestions have been the Canon Pro-2000 and possibly a used IPF8400. The Canon Pro-1000 might still be a consideration if there would be any advantage, but obviously I'm aware there is no roll option, so no panoramas.
Any other suggestions or advice?? Thanks in anticipation! :)
-
If you want to print larger than A2, you cannot use an Epson P800 or a Canon Pro-1000 which both have maximum carriage width of 17 inches. You would be best advised to go for either an Epson SC-P7000 or a Canon Pro-2000 which can print up to 24 inches wide. If you need to go wider than 24 inches you are into an Epson SC-P9000 or a Canon Pro-4000, being 44 inch printers. Price goes up with size. These different machines have different feature sets, so you are best advised to read the specs and the reviews on the options to determine which you think will best meet your needs. All of them produce fine prints in different ways and with some different features.
-
I assume you live in England and so I don't know how useful my experience will be. But in my case I recently purchased a used Canon ipf6400 for $400 off of Craigslist. The original owner had replaced all the inks with 3rd party so I had to spend an additional $450 replacing them for a total of $850, still not bad.
There was a bit of a learning curve for me as all my previous printers were Epsons and the software on the Canon is very different and more complicated. But other than that the printer works fine and I'm very happy with it. BTW, on the ipf6400 the maintenance cartridge can be reused by resetting it (internal software reset command) when it reaches 20% and then dismantling and cleaning it--this can take several hours but saves about $90.
Also when buying a used ipf make sure you print out a full nozzle check (which can only be done in maintenance mode) and not the partial one in regular mode. This way you can accurately judge the condition of the head.
-
To buy a used printer you really have to know what you are doing. It can turn out to be a massive headache and a large waste of money and time unless bought from a reputable source who can back it up with service should the need arise. And one should be able to inspect it thoroughly and use it in situ before purchase. Also the older IPF models do not print as well as the new Pro-2000. I've seen comparisons and I can say with confidence that the results from the new models are superior.
-
Thanks! :D
I could get away with the P800 if I accept that I'm not going to print bigger than 17" wide - and to date I haven't. The biggest consideration is length of print, and I'm not limited by the P800 if I use rolls of paper, which I know I can't use on the Canon Pro-1000. (I have experience of Canon desktop printers, which I guess is why I haven't let that one go entirely, but actually I'm willing to be swayed... If Epson are easier to use)
The Pro-2000 I suspect is more than the printer I need, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'd need to size it up and scout out some space for something that big if I was going to properly consider it. We're looking at probably £1000 difference between the 2 options though.
I think you've put me off buying used :) To be fair, the IPF8000 with at least 1 new print head, 1 maintenance cartridge and 12 new inks, and no native print driver and an inability to test due to the lack of ink and working head was probably going to end up costing not far off the price of a new Pro-2000.
I'm guessing, given that these are the manufacturers / models I keep hearing about, that there aren't really any other quality options in the middle ground, or other manufacturers to consider? No is a perfectly reasonable answer (if surprising, but then I guess paper sizes double, so seems reasonable that the printer sizes and prices do too...)
-
Apart from Canon and Epson, there is also HP, which we tend to hear less about than the others - they do not have a comparable 17" model, but they do have a new 24" model: HP Design Jet (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1426932-REG/hp_w3z71a_b1k_designjet_z9_24_postscript.html). Some members of this Forum really love their previous model z3200 etc. I haven't heard much about this new model but could be worth looking into if there were a dealer in reach.
-
I think I was coming down on the side of the P800, until a sales rep has thrown the Epson P5000, 6000 and 7000 into the mix - they appear to be on offer at the moment, all substantially less than a Canon Pro 2000.
The P5000 seems to have worthwhile benefits over the P800, but the question is, am I going to print the volumes to justify it (and avoid clogging heads)....
The same question also arises with the P6000 and P7000, but then does the extra flexibility of a 24" printer, being able to print width ways what I'd otherwise be printing length ways, for not an awful lot more money, make it a more compelling option? Yeh, it's going to be fun trying to find a home for something that big, but....
I can't see me going beyond 24" now I properly consider it, unless I start printing 2 or 3 photos across a sheet, which would result in me printing less often - so self defeating.
-
Hi James, I'm using a P5000. It's a step-up from a P800 in a number of respects: (i) wider gamut from more inks (orange and green); (ii) automatic in-built roll feed; (iii) more control over maintenance with extra menu items for keeping the nozzles clean; (iv) larger ink tanks making for much lower ink cost per ML; (v) built like a brick s..t-house and (vi) 360 rather than 180 nozzles per inch. Those smaller nozzles I think contribute to it needing more frequent usage than the P800 to minimize ink usage for maintenance. It should be run a couple of times a week to minimize the need for cleaning cycles, but those cycles can be confined to single channel-pairs as needed. Print quality is superb if printing properly. The head and the inkset are the same as for the P7000/P9000 models. The main reason for stepping up to a P7000 would be if you wanted to allow for the height of your panoramas to be higher than 17 inches - for example if you wanted to make a pano 24 inches by 3 feet rather than 17 inches by 3 feet. I do recommend before making a decision you also check out the Canon Pro-2000 - a very nice machine with some slick features and fine output.
-
An additional element to consider is the margin size you want to maintain. I tend to keep a minimum one inch margin on all sides, and preferably two inches. On my SC 6000 I tend to only print to 20 inches of the 24 available.
I am also happy with my P800 and use it for smaller prints and only sheets. I pretty much only use the P6000 for rolls, but if of course works for sheets larger than letter size.
For my work, I do not miss the additional inks of the P7000.
-
Depending on the photo, the extra gamut of the P5000/7000 inkset can come in handy, but for a great many photos it wouldn't make a visible difference.
-
Another reason for a 24" is if you ever want to do canvas. After subtracting 6" on the 24" side for a gallery wrap you're still left with a respectable 18" width canvas size. But with a 17" at the most you can only get a 12" wide canvas.
-
Thanks! :D
I could get away with the P800 if I accept that I'm not going to print bigger than 17" wide - and to date I haven't. The biggest consideration is length of print, and I'm not limited by the P800 if I use rolls of paper, which I know I can't use on the Canon Pro-1000. (I have experience of Canon desktop printers, which I guess is why I haven't let that one go entirely, but actually I'm willing to be swayed... If Epson are easier to use)
Unfortunately the Canon pro-1000 limits you to 25.5 inch long prints according to Canon's website. So the Epson is the only choice for 17" wide panos
-
Unfortunately the Canon pro-1000 limits you to 25.5 inch long prints according to Canon's website. So the Epson is the only choice for 17" wide panos
The "limit" (if you can call it that) on larger Epsons is around 50 feet. This seems to have been a constant from the original Stylus Pro 9000/9500 to the current SureColor P10000 (I've actually owned all 3 of those, though I just have the P10K now). Earlier versions of Photoshop were limited to 30,000 pixels in length, but that was addressed a long time ago. Long before 50 feet you'll want either the automatic take-up reel option or some helpers (with cotton gloves!) to manually roll the completed print. I regularly print up to around 15 feet long.
I don't know if we'll see the techology from the P10000/P20000 filter down to narrower models - not needing to waste ink / time when switching matte / photo black is a huge improvement. But trying to put the $2500 head from those into a printer that sells for $4000-$5000 is likely why we haven't see narrower models based on the P10K/P20K.
-
Another vote for the Pro-2000. I have one and love it. One near-universal truth about large printers is that the prices posted on the Web aren't correct - the dealers have quite a bit of room on the machines (almost none on ink, though). If you're going off a web price, call Shades of Paper (in the US) or one of the others to find out what they're able to get it to you for. I don't know where you're located, and the situation may vary by country.
A quick rundown on the differences between the Pro-2000 and the Epson P7000, which also applies to the 44" Pro-4000 and P9000. Note: the heads and color gamuts are the same on the Pro-1000 and P5000, but the paper feeds aren't - having never used the 17" machines of this generation, I don't know how their feeds work:
1.) The most important difference for many individual photographers may be that Canons can sit idle between prints, and the big Epsons really don't like to. If you print at least once a week, either will be fine. If you're like me (and many other photographers) and go a month without printing, then you spend a day at the printer, a Canon will be much easier to maintain. If you print a lot every day, the situation reverses and the Epson's permanent head becomes an advantage.
2.) Epsons have an incredibly versatile paper feed system. They load rolls from the top, and it's very easy to get the roll in. They also have a straight paper path, which allows manual feeding of essentially anything from silk (on a backing sheet) to metal. As long as it's thin enough to go down the printer's maw, it'll feed through an Epson. Canon's paper feed has a 180 degree turn in it - it goes in the bottom front, then comes out above where it went in. It's a little harder to load than Epson, but still not bad. Heavy fine art paper makes the turn fine, but I'd be wary of REALLY stiff paper and possibly things on backing sheets. Of course, anything rigid like metal, wood or cardboard won't make the turn.
3.) Both have wide gamuts and beautiful color - the Epson is better in saturated oranges and greens, while the Canon is better in deep blues and magentas. Realistically, both are excellent in almost any color found in nature - much of the difference is in super-saturated colors used in graphic arts. I print deep green leaves on my Canon all the time, and I'd have to have a really saturated leaf it right next to an Epson print to see any difference at all. Conversely, I only have a few images with deep blue water or twilight skies where the Canon blues are noticeably better. If you're printing images of ultra-blue paint, or of orange traffic cones, the difference may be more significant...
-
Where you say: Note: the heads and color gamuts are the same on the Pro-1000 and P5000, you probably meant Pro-2000 rather than P5000.
Any pigmented ink printer regardless of whether it's Canon or Epson will need to use ink for maintenance once it sits around unused for a number of days. The Canon does it under the hood, whereas with Epson it's more obvious. I haven't seen rigorous apples to apples comparisons of which models are most economical on use of ink for maintenance notwithstanding that a number of people have strongly held views on the matter, some better documented than others.
As for gamut - Using Ilford Gold Fibre Silk in both the Pro-1000 and Epson P5000 (about the same as using it in a Pro-2000 and Epson P7000), overall gamut volume is 831K for the Canon and 981K for the Epson, a difference of about 150K. You will notice in the attached screen grab that the Canon gamut exceeds the Epson in very little of the spectrum - a bit lighter tone blues and a bit of darker tone orange/reds. That said, for many images these differences would be immaterial.
-
Another vote for the Pro-2000. I have one and love it. One near-universal truth about large printers is that the prices posted on the Web aren't correct - the dealers have quite a bit of room on the machines (almost none on ink, though). If you're going off a web price, call Shades of Paper (in the US) or one of the others to find out what they're able to get it to you for. I don't know where you're located, and the situation may vary by country.
A quick rundown on the differences between the Pro-2000 and the Epson P7000, which also applies to the 44" Pro-4000 and P9000. Note: the heads and color gamuts are the same on the Pro-1000 and P5000, but the paper feeds aren't - having never used the 17" machines of this generation, I don't know how their feeds work:
1.) The most important difference for many individual photographers may be that Canons can sit idle between prints, and the big Epsons really don't like to. If you print at least once a week, either will be fine. If you're like me (and many other photographers) and go a month without printing, then you spend a day at the printer, a Canon will be much easier to maintain. If you print a lot every day, the situation reverses and the Epson's permanent head becomes an advantage.
2.) Epsons have an incredibly versatile paper feed system. They load rolls from the top, and it's very easy to get the roll in. They also have a straight paper path, which allows manual feeding of essentially anything from silk (on a backing sheet) to metal. As long as it's thin enough to go down the printer's maw, it'll feed through an Epson. Canon's paper feed has a 180 degree turn in it - it goes in the bottom front, then comes out above where it went in. It's a little harder to load than Epson, but still not bad. Heavy fine art paper makes the turn fine, but I'd be wary of REALLY stiff paper and possibly things on backing sheets. Of course, anything rigid like metal, wood or cardboard won't make the turn.
For what it's worth, the prices I'm seeing (single supplier, but these are the lowest prices at a quick search) are:
P800 - £1,026.00 (with roll holder)
P5000 - £1,594.80
P6000 - £1,822.80
P7000 - £2,038.80
Pro-2000 - £2,994.00
I have to assume there isn't a > £1000 difference in quality between the Canon and Epson printers, though the dealer suggested Epson tend to discount their printers at the start of the year (these deals are on till the end of January), and Canon tend to discount theirs in the summer. It was suggested that the Canon would likely be available at shows (of which there is one in March I think) for around £2500. I guess it all depends on when I press the trigger on this.... The print lab have been very apologetic about the problems... ;D
I'm going to be printing at least once a week - I'm fairly content about that.
In terms of flexibility, I like the idea* of being able to print on other materials, so a straight through path definitely sounds interesting, so that's possibly 1 plus for the Epson (over and above the price).
-
For what it's worth, the prices I'm seeing (single supplier, but these are the lowest prices at a quick search) are:
P800 - £1,026.00 (with roll holder)
P5000 - £1,594.80
P6000 - £1,822.80
P7000 - £2,038.80
Pro-2000 - £2,994.00
Wow! I'm amazed what this European delivery channels can do to a market. Where I am from (Romania) the price ranges are actually the opposite. I remember before buying my PRO-2000 that I was looking for an Epson but the quotations just wouldn't let me anywhere close to the targeted P7000.
PRO-2000 - 2000 EUR (printer stand included)
P7000 - 3200 EUR
Imagine I was thinking the same: there can't be a 1200 EUR difference between the two and naturally went for the PRO-2000 and I am soooo very pleased and happy with it!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
James, you've not mentioned what size panos you think you're going to be printing or what you'll be doing with the panos that are printed. I'm assuming from the conversation that you're looking for a high quality printer but I'm curious if these will be mounted or hung or what.
Some companies such as Red River offer 13x38" sheets of paper in a range of papers and the costs are quite reasonable if that's of interest to you. They also offer 17x25" papers as does Breathing Color.
-
James, you've not mentioned what size panos you think you're going to be printing or what you'll be doing with the panos that are printed. I'm assuming from the conversation that you're looking for a high quality printer but I'm curious if these will be mounted or hung or what.
Some companies such as Red River offer 13x38" sheets of paper in a range of papers and the costs are quite reasonable if that's of interest to you. They also offer 17x25" papers as does Breathing Color.
You're right - I've not! :D This is the other half of the conundrum - what my product is. I guess what I've defined as my requirement so far is that I'm looking for is flexibility, room to grow, and quality high enough that I can sell and not be concerned that the image won't last or looks cheap - so long lasting inks on fine art papers and a fine / quality printer
With my panos, my aspect ratios are all over the place, but generally between 2:1 and 4:1 - there are bigger ones, but I don't see those getting printed often if at all. If there are cut papers that meet my needs - and those 2 suggestions would meet some of them - then I'll use them in whatever printer is suitable. Rolls give me the flexibility not to care too much, but I won't overlook other options, and cut papers will be in the mix for non-panoramic stuff, if it makes more sense.
In terms of size, I'd want the height of a print to be big enough to display on a wall and not have to get too close that it loses impact. If I managed to get an exhibition some day, be large enough to grab attention. I don't see anything much less than 17" short side doing that. From the experience I've had to date, roughly A2 / 16.5" short side, has been the most common item to sell. I tend to like my printed images to have at least a border, but more recently a mount (or frame), so the finished product is bigger than the image. I don't see myself doing a large number of edge to edge prints, and I understand that wastes more ink as well? The lab has mounted / framed for me to date, and I haven't fully considered how I might do this were I to print myself. It may be that I just print on fine art paper, with a border, as my default product offering, and buy off the shelf frames / mounts if the customer wants one (as I said, not thought beyond the print yet - can you tell?! ;) ).
So, at the moment, an A2+ printer that can take long paper would meet exactly my current demonstrated needs, but perhaps doesn't give me the space to grow or flexibility.
And I'm saying all this as someone who:
- has has no real experience of printing high quality images myself or printing on anything larger than A4,
- has been ordering as and when I've needed something from one of 3 professional labs. The results have been inconsistent (print quality has been fine, it's more likely creases or a defect in the paper, print or border, or a batch of fine art prints yellowing over time), poor customer experience, and not being sure when a print might arrive - which is the why, and the reason I've never pushed my work, or pushed selling - it's only ever been organic from social media posts so far)
-
Having used both 17" and 24" printers extensively (the 17" models years ago, and not the current ones), I prefer the 24" models, but with some caveats.
24" roll paper is more available (more choices kept in stock), and cheaper per square foot than 17" roll paper (in my experience in the northeastern US market).
24" printers have far better ink prices per ml than the smaller 17" printers. Something like a P5000, which uses larger cartridges, reduces the difference.
24" wide prints are really impressive - one of my favorite sizes.
BUT
17" printers sit on a desk, and some of the smaller models like the P800 and even the Pro-1000 are not terribly obtrusive - a P5000 takes up a lot of room on a desk. 24" printers are substantial pieces of furniture, sitting on a stand and weighing 150-200 lbs.
17" printers have practical cut sheet feeders that take 10-20 sheets of art paper, and many of them will even accept 100 sheets of office paper. It's perfectly possible to use a P5000 as an office printer as well as a photo printer. Just make sure you check which paper feed you have selected before printing a 50 page spreadsheet on Platine!
You CAN print sheets on a 24" printer - but you don't WANT to!!! They only feed one sheet at a time, and that one grudgingly. I once printed my Masters' thesis on a 24" iPF 6100 when my laser printer ran out of toner at the worst possible moment, since I needed to get a draft in the next day, and I used the only working printer I had. It took about an hour to hand-feed 60 sheets into the damn thing, and I was glad that my housemate was there to feed the printer while I clicked OK in the driver for every single sheet!
-
By the way, I did mean that the Pro-1000 and Pro-2000 had the same heads and gamut - the P5000 is a totally different machine from a different maker...
While it's not borne out in gamut plots, I find that "Canon blues" make a difference in my landscape images roughly as often as "Epson greens and oranges". Both are immaterial for many images, and I find that the number where I prefer one rendering over the other goes both ways with about equal frequency. As you'd expect, many of the shots where I prefer Epson are at the height of autumn, and many where I prefer Canon are water or twilight.
-
...................
17" printers have practical cut sheet feeders that take 10-20 sheets of art paper, and many of them will even accept 100 sheets of office paper. .............
Nope. For all three professional 17" models now on the market - SC-P5000, SC-P800, Pro-1000, fine art paper heavier/thicker than Premium Luster should be fed through the fine art paper feeders one sheet at a time.
-
Nope. For all three professional 17" models now on the market - SC-P5000, SC-P800, Pro-1000, fine art paper heavier/thicker than Premium Luster should be fed through the fine art paper feeders one sheet at a time.
+1
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
James, based on you recent response perhaps you might consider a couple of options.
1) - get a 17" printer that may meet your immediate needs to print and learn what fine art printing is all about. There is a learning curve. If you need larger prints in this phase of your journey have someone else print them for you.
2)- as your needs swing more and more to larger prints add a 24" to your stable of printers. If after doing so you don't find yourself using the 17" sell it.
I currently use a P800 because it has been rock solid with no issues for 3+ years and produces very good results. One downside for the P800 with roll paper is it doesn't have a built-in paper cutter. The P5000 remedies that.
I'm an avid non-professional photographer and printer. I do love great prints of my work and my wife's. These days I have a friend in California print my larger needs.
I do miss my 24" HP Z3100 with roll paper and built-in spectro. I probably printed 16x24" more than anything else because I was shooting a LOT of sports and selling prints then. I gave up on the 24" because it required periodic maintenance from HP (maintenance contracts weren't inexpensive). I don't think the latest batch of 24" printers are necessarily as needy. Ask around.
-
In terms of normal office / desktop printing, I'd be keeping my Canon MG7750 with its cassette anyway and just start using generic inks rather than OEM. This large printer would solely be for photography (of any size).
Space is probably now my prime concern - at current prices I think I'm content that my preference would be to go for a 24" printer if I can find somewhere to put it. :D rdonson, I do see your point about 17" though, and I definitely appreciate there is going to be a MASSIVE learning curve, given how my attempts to print on my existing printer have gone! I just don't think I'd ever be able to explain to my wife why I'd need another, bigger printer, at some point in the future! ;D I kind of feel I should get the pain out of the way in one go! 8)
-
I told me wife I could sell enough prints to pay for it and that I got a GREAT deal on the 24" (it just came on the market and they had some excellent incentives). Of course, my annual corporate bonus that paid for it was the deciding factor. ;D
-
I have both a P800 and a P6000. Getting a 24-inch or larger printer pretty much means also having a smaller printer. A 17-inch printer takes very little space and can produce quite large prints: how often do you need prints larger than that? Only you can of course answer that. All I know is that if I had space for only one printer it would be my P800, or a similar new model such as the 5000.
-
Which size printer to buy really should be a pretty simple decision:
(1) Do you have space for a 24 inch printer: yes, option open; no, option closed.
(2) Do you have budget for a 24 inch printer: yes, option open; no, option closed.
(3) Do you need more than 17 inch height including borders for a pano: yes, if (1) AND (2) are yes, buy 24 inch; if no, buy 17 inch.
-
I think this is possibly the last question.... :D
I think I'm likely to go for the P7000. To answer the 3 questions, I can answer yes to all 3... (if need / want are interchangable!) but....
The (oddly shaped) space I have for it currently has a set of drawers and a low filing cabinet in it. The question is, if I put a large, sturdy shelf in above the existing furniture for the printer, is having the printer not on the stand a viable solution? Do I need easy / quick 360 degree access to the printer? Or is most of the action possible from the front / above? and does the stand add any value other than to hold the printer?
-
The printer is very heavy and the paper drop is integrated with the stand. Never seen such printers used without the stand.
-
I think this is possibly the last question.... :D
I think I'm likely to go for the P7000. To answer the 3 questions, I can answer yes to all 3... (if need / want are interchangable!) but....
The (oddly shaped) space I have for it currently has a set of drawers and a low filing cabinet in it. The question is, if I put a large, sturdy shelf in above the existing furniture for the printer, is having the printer not on the stand a viable solution? Do I need easy / quick 360 degree access to the printer? Or is most of the action possible from the front / above? and does the stand add any value other than to hold the printer?
Hi James,
To start, I do have the P7000 and as of the other Epson ProGraphic printers I've had, it does a great job. I downsized from the SP9900(44") when I moved my business to my home location almost two years ago. As far as the printer stand is concerned, that's somethingI have always used. Of course I've also always had room to do so. Since you have not yet used an Epson Wide Format printer you would not necessarily have experienced the slight but obviously "sway" as the carriage moves back and forth. If you put the printer on a solid foundation other than the stand, that swaying motion will not happen. However, one advantage of the sway is the slight and perhaps helpful agitation of the inks. This is something that has been talked about here and in another forum since my first 24" printer(SP7600) back in 2003. Again, that swaying motion is probably something you would never miss, and I rather doubt it's something that Epson has engineered for the purpose of agitating the inks, but it can't hurt. One thing I would warn against, although rather benign in the overall picture. Don't put the printer on a carpeted floor, for two reasons. If you ever have an ink leak, something I've never experienced fortunately, it would obviously be a rather nasty thing to clean up, and probably impossible. Reason number two is the fact that these printers are heavy, and if you ever have to move it you will find that the castors have embedded themselves very nicely in the carpet. Not saying a move wouldn't be impossible, just much easier on a smooth floor.
I hope I haven't added yet another question to your quest James, just a thought or two. :)
EDIT: Hello Mark. Once again we have been typing a reply simultaneously :-[
Gary
-
Cool, thanks both!
Garnick, I think it was your thread I found earlier when trying to decide between a P6000 and P7000! :D
We'll stick with the stand in that case! :) If it's on castors, it can be moved easily, meaning we can get to the filing cabinet if needs be. It'll be on a wooden floor, so hopefully easier to clean up in the event of any issues!
So no, don't think you've added any more questions to my list! :) The HP DesignJet Z9 post almost made me start to wonder if I needed to rethink, but nah! P7000.... will phone round suppliers tomorrow.
-
Cool, thanks both!
............... The HP DesignJet Z9 post almost made me start to wonder if I needed to rethink, but nah! P7000.... will phone round suppliers tomorrow.
Well, being that you are at the front end of a large purchase decision that you will be living with for a number of years, it wouldn't do any harm to at least evaluate the HP option carefully. It is a new model with a dearth of any serious review information (seems the company itself is not pro-active in having it reviewed), but if you can find a convenient place that has one up and running, could be good to have a look.
-
It was actually the discussion about the T120 that made me wonder about HP rather than the Z9. I'd be worried about taking a chance on a printer (Z9) that has so little information or comparisons available out there, especially with the Epson prices currently so low. As someone new to this, not having knowledge and experience to build on seems a bad idea :/
-
Didn't press "buy" yet as one of the suppliers was going to do a test print on a Pro 2000 and a Z9 (they didn't have an Epson to test on - they seemed surprised I was asking..!). Not heard back from the supplier after sending the image off. Would have been an interesting comparison, but the fact it's all gone quiet kind of helps make the decision for me!
In the mean time it seems that the 2 P7000 suppliers that had prices ~£2000ish are now offering a free 3 year warranty on it (and the discount I was told would run out at the end of January didn't, hmm....! ???)
I'm glad I held off!
-
A little thread dredge....
The Photography Show is on in the UK at the moment, so they've got a ton of show deals on. I'd gone with my head set on the P7000, but the show got to me a little, and there wasn't a lot of love out there for the P7000! The Canon people maybe got to me....
However, deal wise, I could get:
Pro-2000 for £2400 (~$3200) including a spare set on 160ml inks on top of the starter inks that come with it.
P7000 for £1700 (~$2260), with 3 year warranty.
I managed to get a couple of stunning test prints from a Pro 2000. One of the supposedly neutral suppliers also did a comparison test print from the P7000, but it looked awful, and they were pushing the Canon quite heavily - don't think it was a like for like comparison. I've still not managed to get a P7000 test print.
With the deal on the inks, what would you do?
-
The Pro-2000 is an excellent printer, but there's no reason why one should necessarily get comparatively awful prints from an SC-P7000; it too is an excellent printer. It's the same printhead and inks as the SC-P5000, but bigger width and much bigger machine. If there is an Epson booth at that show, go there and have a look. Both printers will produce lovely output.
I wouldn't be swayed one way or another by the initial ink deal. Think of the long term. Look at the feature set and usability of each relative to your taste and your needs and make a decision based on which one you think you will be more comfortable operating over the next four or five years. Then bargain with the supplier on price and enticements.
-
A little thread dredge....
The Photography Show is on in the UK at the moment, so they've got a ton of show deals on. I'd gone with my head set on the P7000, but the show got to me a little, and there wasn't a lot of love out there for the P7000! The Canon people maybe got to me....
However, deal wise, I could get:
Pro-2000 for £2400 (~$3200) including a spare set on 160ml inks on top of the starter inks that come with it.
P7000 for £1700 (~$2260), with 3 year warranty.
I managed to get a couple of stunning test prints from a Pro 2000. One of the supposedly neutral suppliers also did a comparison test print from the P7000, but it looked awful, and they were pushing the Canon quite heavily - don't think it was a like for like comparison. I've still not managed to get a P7000 test print.
With the deal on the inks, what would you do?
If the Epson 3 year warranty includes head replacement then I'd go for that one. At least that way you'd know you'll have 3 years of trouble free printing.
-
If the Epson 3 year warranty includes head replacement then I'd go for that one. At least that way you'd know you'll have 3 years of trouble free printing.
And of course if you don't mind that the P7000 retains the idiotic black ink switching...
-
Mark, I get the impression they set the P7000 up to fail - paper, settings, combination of the above - whatever it was, the result was significantly poorer in terms of contrast and detail capture. Whilst they sold multiple brands, I was taken to their stand by someone from the official Canon exhibit... Cheeky...!
-
My larger printers are all 44" but you can still use them to compare.
My P8000 is a fantastic printer and extremely fast. The big plus with my Epson's is the refillable carts allow me to purchase OEM inks from printer owners changing printer models and you can get the oem inks at less then .10 per ml and extract the inks and install it in the refillables. You may not print nearly enough for this to interest you.
I have a new HP z3200 I purchased to try out as it was only $2495. The output is superb but the speed is half that of my P8000. I leave my most used photo paper in it and maybe use it once a week. I never switch inks on the Epson's so it is no factor for me.
10 years an Epson man with very few complaints other then service calls are a killer at $120 an hour labor.
-
I don't know where you live, but here in Toronto there are precious few service calls for anything that don't cost in the range of 100-125 per hour. It's pretty standard.
-
For printer repair it is probably normal here in Pa. as well, just complaining.
My whole life has been running time and material businesses. (The first mistake)
I spent 25 years in my cabinetry business charging $45 per man hour in 2009. We tried raising our rate to $50 an hour and lost half the quotes I bid on.
With a 3500 sq. ft building and $100,000 worth of equipment plus 3 of the best craftsman in the area that was all we could charge.
Just sort of always irked me when the Epson printer repair guy showed up with his screwdriver pouch and spent a half day here for a 500 dollar bill.
Vent over, that business sold.
-
Well that's it done - Epson P7000 ordered!
Canon nearly had me persuaded yesterday, but the reasons I was looking at the P7000 haven't gone away, and I think I can accept the downsides in exchange for the price and the warranty, which covers the head.
Stand by for the incoming stupid questions about how to set it up and use it next! :D and thanks so much for all of your advice to get me this far!
-
Stand by for the incoming stupid questions about how to set it up and use it next! :D and thanks so much for all of your advice to get me this far!
Please read the manual first, do your research from the experience of others who have gone before you, and if there is anything left that needs to be asked about, by all means........by then the questions won't be stupid. :)
-
Oh - and congrats - use it well. You should not be disappointed.
-
Please read the manual first, do your research from the experience of others who have gone before you, and if there is anything left that needs to be asked about, by all means........by then the questions won't be stupid. :)
That is indeed the plan! :)
-
I don't know where you live, but here in Toronto there are precious few service calls for anything that don't cost in the range of 100-125 per hour. It's pretty standard.
Consider yourself lucky if you have any service at all. There is no carry-in or on-site Epson service here in Nashville at any price. Basically, if you can't fix it yourself, you throw it away and start over.
-
Well, it arrived, and it was fun trying to get it in the house!!! But it's in and working.
One minor gotcha.... the printer comes with a roll of Epson Doubleweight Matte paper for head alignment. One thing it doesn't seem to come with is an ICC profile for Epson Doubleweight Matte Paper! There isn't a single installed profile there with DWMP in the filename, or any obvious alternative, and I can't find one anywhere to download!
Am I supposed to be using an alternative profile for this paper? The instruction sheet that comes with the paper doesn't mention a profile?
The paper does appear on the print menu drop downs, but I'm trying to soft proof. Any suggestions?
-
Have you unpacked the driver to drill down to where the profiles are stored? It may be there but for some reason not showing in your software. If it is there, you can copy it to your profiles folder in your OS and all the usual applications should find it there.
-
yup, tried that - the ICC files in the driver are the same as the ones installed - so all duplicates - nothing different.
-
In that case, I recommend you test a "nearest neighbour" profiles. I don't know that particular paper, but if it OBA-free and has a natural (as opposed to a very white) finish, you may try to profile for Epson Hot Press Natural, or Epson Legacy Fibre. If it's very white paper, Epson Hot Press Bright may be usable. It's a bit of trial and error finding the best near-fit, but short of getting a custom profile it may work well enough for you. A number of these papers are not so different in their ink receiving characteristics that mix and match between paper and profile can be workable.
-
Thanks Mark, will give that a shot. I doubt this would be a paper I'd use beyond this first roll, so I guess getting it near enough should be good enough to carry out some test prints without them looking awful