Mega tank printers from Epson and Canon?

[adias]

Anyone tried the new mega tank printers from Epson and Canon?

[howardm]

like this?  Or which model(s) are you referring to?

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4369776

[dehnhaide]

Anyone tried the new mega tank printers from Epson and Canon?

It's c**p reinvented, basically! Because CISS was too mainstream and cheap already, they (Epson at least) jumped it to have their own share from the refill inks market.
To me, at least, Epson super pretentious "Expression Premium ET-7750 EcoTank" it's a hit at making low-level (they even use this qualifier!) dye market feel important. What good / performance one would would expect to get from 4x140ml for 55USD?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[adias]

It's c**p reinvented, basically! Because CISS was too mainstream and cheap already, they (Epson at least) jumped it to have their own share from the refill inks market.
To me, at least, Epson super pretentious "Expression Premium ET-7750 EcoTank" it's a hit at making low-level (they even use this qualifier!) dye market feel important. What good / performance one would would expect to get from 4x140ml for 55USD?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The trend is towards larger ink tanks and cheaper refills or printing at home will die (for the consumer at large and the hobbyist).

[adias]

like this?  Or which model(s) are you referring to?

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4369776

Thanks for the link! It looks like there are better informative threads at DR these days.

[Peter McLennan]

For two decades, I've had a succession of Epsons, all running either a CIS or refillable tanks.  I always said that if Epson came out with a stock CIS system printer, I'd buy it.
 
They did, so I did.  An Epson L-805 ordered off ebay, direct from Asia.
 
Fantastic little printer. Zero clogs or other troubles in nearly two years of continuous use. Letter-size only (or legal). I've printed more images with this printer than any other.  Coupled with Kirkland glossy photo paper, my per-page cost is about USD $0.25 per print.  Awesome.  Full bleed prints, too.  Borderless letter size.

No fading issues with the dye inks, even with prints stuck on my fridge for most of those two years.  In direct sunlight? Maybe. Substantial metamerism with monochrome prints, but not (to a casual viewer) apparent with colour prints.  Dye inks are capable of substantial saturation on print.

So far so good. I love this device.  As do all my friends who are given prints regularly. 

[digitaldog]

Thanks for the link! It looks like there are better informative threads at DR these days.

Oh no, it's a cesspool of misinformed poster more often than not. 
What kind of printer from Epson are you referring to?

[adias]

Oh no, it's a cesspool of misinformed poster more often than not. 
What kind of printer from Epson are you referring to?

Just in general the new gen of large tank refillable ink printers Epson and canon are offering.

I care about great image/print quality and some print longevity but would care less for 200-year (supposedly) prints - I will not be here by then so I do not care, and my prints will not be in a museum wall; I know many on these forums have (or aspire to) those.

[digitaldog]

I have an EcoTank multi function and it's very nice but I don't use it for printing photos; the 3880 is for that.

[enduser]

DPR printer forum is more a consumer forum than a "cesspool", many well known names post there as well. There is a general feeling that tank printers have inferior ink to stop refillers using it. However there's at least on of the major three printer companies that produces a pigment ink tank product that might entice re-fillers to use the bottles of ink.

[digitaldog]

DPR printer forum is more a consumer forum than a "cesspool", many well known names post there as well. There is a general feeling that tank printers have inferior ink to stop refillers using it. However there's at least on of the major three printer companies that produces a pigment ink tank product that might entice re-fillers to use the bottles of ink.

Consumers yes, but some cesspool regulars who haven't got a clue. Anyway, at least with respect to my EcoTank Epson, it's a very nice office printer, multifunction and I suppose, for even consumers, an occasional photo print. But that's about it. Anyone even reasonably serious about a photo printer will look elsewhere.

[deanwork]

Epson is hardly going to market refillable ink carts and gallon bottles of pigments, ( opening the gates for cheap third party ink formulas ) which would be easy to do and their economic downfall,  because their business model is based on these little carts. That’s just the way it is. Not complaining, just saying...

But you know, at least they are doing something with the office printers. I believe they were forced into that in the European and Asian  markets and it eventually trickled down to North America.

Consumers yes, but some cesspool regulars who haven't got a clue. Anyway, at least with respect to my EcoTank Epson, it's a very nice office printer, multifunction and I suppose, for even consumers, an occasional photo print. But that's about it. Anyone even reasonably serious about a photo printer will look elsewhere.

[nirpat89]

For now they all seem to be letter/legal sizes only (8.5" carrier) if I am not mistaken (the last time I checked.)  The "economy" of these eco-tanks itself is fuzzy - based on what kind of printing one does:

https://www.ldproducts.com/blog/is-the-epson-ecotank-really-worth-the-money/

But considering that the printers come without pre-filled ink, one can use any third party inks without having to worry about flushing or chip resetting etc.  For example this individual used a silver nano-ink to print circuitry:

https://nirzaree.wordpress.com/2016/12/07/setting-up-conductive-inkjet-printing/

[dehnhaide]

Consumers yes, but some cesspool regulars who haven't got a clue. Anyway, at least with respect to my EcoTank Epson, it's a very nice office printer, multifunction and I suppose, for even consumers, an occasional photo print. But that's about it. Anyone even reasonably serious about a photo printer will look elsewhere.

+1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rasworth]

There appear to be at least two categories of the Epson EcoTank printers - several with 4 inks offered in the USA, and one (L805) with 6 inks available in rest of world.  One can obtain the L805 from Ebay and Newegg via an international vendor, any information as to when a 6 ink version will be more widely available in the USA?

Richard Southworth

[Peter McLennan]

... at least with respect to my EcoTank Epson, it's a very nice office printer, multifunction and I suppose, for even consumers, an occasional photo print. But that's about it. Anyone even reasonably serious about a photo printer will look elsewhere.

Mine makes excellent prints, with the limitations I've listed above.
For clarification, my Epson 805 is a six ink printer.  All other USA-available "office" printers are four ink units.

[digitaldog]

Mine makes excellent prints, with the limitations I've listed above.
For clarification, my Epson 805 is a six ink printer.  All other USA-available "office" printers are four ink units.

I never said it can't make lovely prints. It can. It can't produce the kinds of prints, use the same kinds of papers or produce the gamut and longevity of a printer like a P600 or in my case, P800 or 3880. An occasional print fine. It is a multipurpose office printer.

[Rado]

I have an Epson L1800 (A3 ink tank printer) and P800. I use the L1800 for printing non-photographic stuff in color, it's great for that. For photos the P800 has a noticeably better gamut. I was not able to get a neutral looking b/w print on the L1800 with Epson's AWB mode.

Price wise one ink cartridge for P800 costs about as much as replacing all the ink in the L1800.

Clogging - my P800 has yet to fail a nozzle check. The L1800 has required power ink flush several times after an extended period of not being used (3+ weeks). The printers sit side by side and both get used at the same time (i.e. if I print something on one of them I'll print at least QImage's declog pattern on the other too).

[Peter McLennan]

I was not able to get a neutral looking b/w print on the L1800 with Epson's AWB mode.

Nor was I.  Monochrome prints are not these printers' forte.  On a B/W print, even in colour (not AWB) mode, the metamerism of the dye inks on monochrome prints is horrendous.  You can have either magenta in 3200K light, or horrid green in 5600K.  Full colour prints don't show this, at least to my eye.  Technical measurements may disagree with me.

Agreement on the ink price.  You can print without pain.  Imagine!    Twenty cents (USD) per full-bleed letter-size image is great.  These printers actually encourage printing.

[digitaldog]

On a B/W print, even in colour (not AWB) mode, the metamerism of the dye inks on monochrome prints is horrendous.

Sorry, pet peeve. But metamerism is a very good and useful attribute.

Metamerism is simple: two (2) samples with different spectra compared to each other with a given set of viewing conditions, produce a match. Metamerism only applies to two color patches when they are compared. It is not correct to refer to one color from a given ink or paper and say that it suffers from metamerism. A "meterameric pair of color patches" means that they appear to match under a given illuminant. However, they may not appear to match under another illuminant. Metamers ("metameric stimuli") by definition are two different spectrums that appear to be the same color. If they don't look the same color, they are not metamers.

If you are viewing a print (lots of colors) and within differing viewing conditions, and there is a mismatch, this could be called a metameric mismatch or metameric failure. But its not metamerism. One sample (the print) compared to itself in differing viewing conditions, the proper term would be when they appear to match is color constancy and when they don't, color inconstancy.
The lack of a defined term for the metameric mismatch is the problem. 
"Metameric failure" is the best so far because it is unambiguous.