Hi all,
It's true that on paper this isn't the evolutionary jump that the X900 was from the X880 series. This new printer represents a measured and incremental improvement over the X900 series. It's also worth noting that printer isn't yet shipping and it's worth withholding some judgements until it's actually out in the hands of working professionals. The quality of the printer is also likely to improve over time. I used both beta 7900 and Z3100 and Z3200 printers back in the day and they both improved dramatically in the first year after introduction(especially the Z3100) thanks to firmware tweaks.
Here's my .02 cents on a few issues raised by some of the previous comments.
1. B/W.
The black has been reformulated. I can't comment yet on how this will impact gray balance. In terms of the smoothness of tonal transitions it can't really be argued that having an extra shade of black provides an extra "tool" for making smooth and neutral gray ramps. That said, screening, drop size, LUT's and software ultimately are what drive quality in this area. I remember looking at 720x720 prints on the 9900 compared to 1440X720 prints on the 9800 and they were visually almost identical. Screening and drop size produced a better looking print even with less addressable "resolution".
In terms of gray balance there's the out of the box neutrality of the inks, one area where HP did quite well. And then there's the perceptual gray balance of a print. This later is really a function of the color management systems which varies by application, profile, resolution etc. One area Epson has put a lot of energy into is improving the internal color tables. This has a big impact on gray neutrality and color gamut overall. While 3 channel gray is arguably going to give the best results for full B/W prints, I suspect that the quality achieved by 2 channel gray will still be very good. Would it have been nice to have an extra channel and not have had to make the choice, sure.
2. Mechanical - The new printer uses new components in a number of places. It remains to be seen how much of an impact this will have on reduced nozzle cogs and more reliable cleaning, but I suspect it will be noticeable. Only time will tell. The issue of pressurized inks and ink waste is one of those touchy subject so I'm going to tread lightly. Sure the black ink switch is less than ideal, it also eliminates the need for a dedicated channel on the print head for each ink. Keep in mind that the printer is built with a print head that has 5 rows of nozzles, with two colors per row. How those channels are used is something that can be changed relatively easily. Reengineering the head is a more complicated task, and one that affects not just Epson but all the people they supply print heads to. As far as ink waste, yes piezo print heads use ink to clean themselves. Canon and HP have replaceable print heads, a result of the thermal print head technology. They both have their plusses an minuses. I hand it to Canon in that I think they have a very nice balance of technologies that result in a low TCO. Epson's gotten a lot better, and I'll also add that the video currently circulating is missing an important detail. Mainly that when you buy a 350ml cart it has more than 350ml of ink in it to start. Not saying that the cleaning doesn't waste ink, it does. But it's important to give all the details when making a critical evaluation of a technology.
One area that's not getting a lot of press, and probably isn't as interesting to the photo world, is the new management system built into the printer and the optional hard drive. In the enterprise world this is kind of a big deal. This printer is targeted at a WIDE range of users. Photography, proofing, graphic design, color accurate CADs, fine art, etc.... They aren't going to please everyone. But they cast a wide net in terms of providing features for many audiences.
3. Color - Color's my thing, and yet I'm kind of tired of talking about color gamut in inkjet printers. Depending on how you slice it you'll find gamut "advantages" in each of the Canon, HP, or Epson printers. Generally these are somewhat small differences. All produce amazing output. Substrate choices have a huge impact on color gamut, this was especially true for the HP on matte paper. Good profiles can easily shift color gamut 10%, and different profiling tools and settings also have a big impact. Using a RIP can influence this although the growing trend have been to use the OEM "screening" which means you'll likely get the same color as you would out of the OEM drivers. This is a result of the complexity introduced by having CMYK+ ink sets. At the end of the day these printers let an individual customize the printer to prioritize what's most important to them. If you do product photography or graphic design then violet might be a killer feature. General purpose photography will probably be fine with either configuration, and heavily focused BW and will probably keep the extra K.
Once we get our final shipping printer there will be plenty more to share!
Thanks,
Julian Mussi
Spectraflow