Epson Surecolor P900 lust

[IPDOUGLAS]

For those interested

Keith Cooper of http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/keiths-photography-blog/ according to his own words is planning to release his review of the P700 on Wednesday 26th August 2020.     This should broadly applicable to the P900 also.

It is pretty clear that the P900 is the 'wiser buy' as far as ink cartridge volume/price.   

I agree though that the huge delay in the P900 suggests 'trouble at mill' i.e. some manufacturing glitch perhaps as important is how available the ink cartridges are to buy since so much ink is consumed on set-up (of the P700) that Epson Europe are supplying a 'free' extra maintenance cartridge. 

I can only think this is because the initial one gets filled (or almost filled) on set-up?

I really cannot get my head around why Epson chose smaller ink cartridges for the P900 versus the P800 it replaces?

[mac_paolo]

I really cannot get my head around why Epson chose smaller ink cartridges for the P900 versus the P800 it replaces?

Just guessing, because the typical P800 user probably used to change cartirdges every 12 months or so, and it's bad to leave the ink "open" for long periods of time.
Even I, happy R3000 owner, sometime leave tiny 25.9ml cartridges for a year or more (less used colors), and I print quite a lot, but small in size..

[mearussi]

I really cannot get my head around why Epson chose smaller ink cartridges for the P900 versus the P800 it replaces?

So Epson could make it smaller.

[dgberg]

But why? Who needs or wants a smaller printer?
I would pay more to have it heavier, less plastic, more robust, like the P5000.

[rdonson]

The P5000 is a very nice printer but some people are reluctant to spend the extra $$$ for it and go for the P800 or the new P900 instead. 

[mearussi]

But why? Who needs or wants a smaller printer?
I would pay more to have it heavier, less plastic, more robust, like the P5000.
[/quote/
Who knows, bragging rights maybe. But they're certainly making a lot of noise about how much smaller it is than the older model.

[KeithR]

For those interested

Keith Cooper of http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/keiths-photography-blog/ according to his own words is planning to release his review of the P700 on Wednesday 26th August 2020.     This should broadly applicable to the P900

His review is now online and includes links to videos he has made about the printer.  The review is quite extensive and informative.

[Jager]

The 3800, the 3880, the P800, and the soon-to-be P900 have all set square in the middle of the Prosumer DIY printer marketplace.  That printer size/quality and price point were very attractive to a broad audience, ranging from serious amateurs to value-oriented professionals.

Epson's focus on size and looks in the P900 suggests that the marketing folks have gained ascendency over the engineers.  Alas.

I predict a short product lifecycle, as Epson learns the hard way that they didn't really understand the customers who bought all those older, mid-size, pigment-ink photo printers.

[IPDOUGLAS]

Epson's focus on size and looks in the P900 suggests that the marketing folks have gained ascendency over the engineers.  Alas.

I predict a short product lifecycle, as Epson learns the hard way that they didn't really understand the customers who bought all those older, mid-size, pigment-ink photo printers.

Certainly having read Keith Coopers review of the P700 (and the P900 must be the same) it does look like Epson have not quite got it right this time and there is some truth in what you say.   The reduction in the volumes of ink are beyond belief?  The paper handling (with paper now costing more than ever!) leaves something to be desired.  The prosumer/enthusiast printer really has no natural 'obvious' buy in this printer area with the horrendous issues with the now discontinued Canon Imageprograf 1000, the minute ink cartridges in the Canon 300 and now Epson have potentially missed a great chance possibly without some rapid changes by Epson. 

[Ferp]

The 3800, the 3880, the P800, and the soon-to-be P900 have all set square in the middle of the Prosumer DIY printer marketplace.  That printer size/quality and price point were very attractive to a broad audience, ranging from serious amateurs to value-oriented professionals.

Epson's focus on size and looks in the P900 suggests that the marketing folks have gained ascendency over the engineers.  Alas.

I predict a short product lifecycle, as Epson learns the hard way that they didn't really understand the customers who bought all those older, mid-size, pigment-ink photo printers.

I don't know enough about the new printers to be able to agree with confidence, but that's my hunch too.  The 3800 and 3880 were positioned by Epson as Pro printers, albeit at the bottom of the Pro range.  I can't help but wonder whether too many non-pro folk were buying them, rather than the smaller desktop printers with higher per ml ink costs.

[John Hollenberg]

The prosumer/enthusiast printer really has no natural 'obvious' buy in this printer area with the horrendous issues with the now discontinued Canon Imageprograf 1000...

Not sure where you are getting it.  Printer is for sale on Canon USA web site and at B&H.  I haven't seen any evidence it has been discontinued (but I certainly wouldn't buy one myself).

John

[IPDOUGLAS]

Not sure where you are getting it.  Printer is for sale on Canon USA web site and at B&H.  I haven't seen any evidence it has been discontinued (but I certainly wouldn't buy one myself).

John

See here

I guess Canon USA are dumping old stock at lower prices?

[John Hollenberg]

See here

I guess Canon USA are dumping old stock at lower prices?

That page says the following: " If we’re seeing an update to the PRO-1000 then I’ll be very surprised if it’s in 2020."  No replacement model has been announced.  The Pro-10 is being replaced.  Of course the PRO-1000 will be replaced eventually.  So far this is all rumor and speculation.

[FabienP]

Certainly having read Keith Coopers review of the P700 (and the P900 must be the same) it does look like Epson have not quite got it right this time and there is some truth in what you say.   The reduction in the volumes of ink are beyond belief?  The paper handling (with paper now costing more than ever!) leaves something to be desired.  The prosumer/enthusiast printer really has no natural 'obvious' buy in this printer area with the horrendous issues with the now discontinued Canon Imageprograf 1000, the minute ink cartridges in the Canon 300 and now Epson have potentially missed a great chance possibly without some rapid changes by Epson.

Keith's review of the P700 IMO clearly shows that the printer is a bit flimsy and not up to the durability standards of the previous generation. The paper exit tray and roll holder look like they could fail after little use. I am unsure what to think of the paper handling rails which put the paper in the centre of the tray, no matter the size. That doesn't look like a heavy duty system.

Initial cartridges are almost empty after the initial ink load, as previously suspected. The endurance of the maintenance tank is an utter joke as it needs to be replaced after only two sets of cartridges. This seems to be a result of the initial ink load procedure which purges the fluid in the lines and is not representative of the normal behaviour later in the life of the printer.

The only good news is that the printer seems to be able to completely use the ink in the cartridges, with only a few drops left in the used cartridges.

If the P900 is an identical build scaled to 17" width, it doesn't look good. We now know what is the price to pay for a smaller and lighter printer. I predict that Epson will have to lower the recommended price to clear inventory.

Cheers,
Fabien

[nicov]

I just disposed of my defective Canon Pro-1 and will replace it with a P900. Compared to the Pro-1, this will give me:
- A2 print sizes. The Pro-1 only got to A3+ sizes, but in practice much less due to the 1 inch print margins on most papers.
- More space in my office, and due the lower weight I may even store it somewhere else when I’m not printing.
My ink usage on the Pro-1 was terrible due to my infrequent printing. It seemed that every time I printed something I had to spent half an hour going through cleaning cycles and replacing half of the cartridges. Hopefully the P900 isn’t that bad with ink waste, and even if it is, I guess that’s the cost of infrequent printing.
For me, the low weight and relatively small size (for an A2 photo printer) is THE reason to buy this printer, and I am not aware of anything else that scores better in this regard.

[IPDOUGLAS]

Nicov,
          What you say makes sense and the P900 seems ideal for your usage however most printers are not fond of being moved back and forth so my advice would be to only do this if absolutely necessary.  Enjoy the P900 and let us know how you get on.

[IPDOUGLAS]

I just disposed of my defective Canon Pro-1 and will replace it with a P900. Compared to the Pro-1, this will give me:
- A2 print sizes. The Pro-1 only got to A3+ sizes, but in practice much less due to the 1 inch print margins on most papers.
- More space in my office, and due the lower weight I may even store it somewhere else when I’m not printing.
My ink usage on the Pro-1 was terrible due to my infrequent printing. It seemed that every time I printed something I had to spent half an hour going through cleaning cycles and replacing half of the cartridges. Hopefully the P900 isn’t that bad with ink waste, and even if it is, I guess that’s the cost of infrequent printing.
For me, the low weight and relatively small size (for an A2 photo printer) is THE reason to buy this printer, and I am not aware of anything else that scores better in this regard.

Totally agree with everything you say here as from my observations and what little there is to read about the P700 and P900 is true.   I am very disappointed as having sworn never to buy another Canon printer (the Imageprograf pro 1000 is a nightmare) the new Epsons appeared to be a dream answer for me personally.  I was especially interested by the 'blacker' black (DMAX) and the removal of black cartridge swopping out.  The Epson printer nozzle blockage reputation and a non-replaceable print head still hang over Epsons like the sword of Damocles.

The initial ink usage priming the printer for first use is a necessary evil but in a way the ink cartridge volumes (of both printers) is clearly exposed as more than mean but in fact a design/engineering/marketing error.  Keith Cooper of Northlight-images.co.uk has opened a P700 cartridge and reported that there is space for more ink (I do not know if this is true in a P900 ink cartridge).  Epson would do well to quickly address this issue by 'upping' the ink volumes and retaining the pricing.  I am only guessing (on the engineering front) that this is feasible and it may not be so.  Certainly manufacturing larger maintenance cartridges would require re-tooling and drastic changes but halving the price of maintenance cartridges would address that quickly.

I am tempted to get one of the few remaining P800s and equipping it with either Permajets or Fotospeeds refillable ink systems that I have heard good things about.  An extra cost outlay that soon pays for itself and frees the artist photographer to print more and more cheaply.

[KeithR]

I acquired the 800 to replace a 4800 in May when a rebate was available with the idea of repurposing it to use Piezography with the chip less solution and pre ordered the 900 for color. At the time, I  also ordered a 2nd set of inks and a maintenance tank for the 900. I now have the ink and tank but am very surprised that the tank is the same size for the 900 as it is for the 700. If what I read about the 700 maintenance tank almost full upon the initial fill, then the 900 will definitely  be full. These tanks are small in size in that it would almost fit inside the maintenance tank of my 4800. Price for the tank is $20.00 at B&H.

[mearussi]

I acquired the 800 to replace a 4800 in May when a rebate was available with the idea of repurposing it to use Piezography with the chip less solution and pre ordered the 900 for color. At the time, I  also ordered a 2nd set of inks and a maintenance tank for the 900. I now have the ink and tank but am very surprised that the tank is the same size for the 900 as it is for the 700. If what I read about the 700 maintenance tank almost full upon the initial fill, then the 900 will definitely  be full. These tanks are small in size in that it would almost fit inside the maintenance tank of my 4800. Price for the tank is $20.00 at B&H.
[/quote/

And the 4800 maintenance tanks can be reused indefinitely by just resetting the chip.

[IPDOUGLAS]

I acquired the 800 to replace a 4800 in May when a rebate was available with the idea of repurposing it to use Piezography with the chip less solution and pre ordered the 900 for color. At the time, I  also ordered a 2nd set of inks and a maintenance tank for the 900. I now have the ink and tank but am very surprised that the tank is the same size for the 900 as it is for the 700. If what I read about the 700 maintenance tank almost full upon the initial fill, then the 900 will definitely  be full. These tanks are small in size in that it would almost fit inside the maintenance tank of my 4800. Price for the tank is $20.00 at B&H.
[/quote/

And the 4800 maintenance tanks can be reused indefinitely by just resetting the chip.

Thanks Keith,   that is very interesting and I would suppose/expect the same as you though in practical terms. However even though the P900 has greater volume of ink than the P700 in its cartridges I guess only a similar volume of ink (slightly more in P900 as I guess the tubes are slightly longer) is needed to replace the shipping fluid and to prime the print head.  Thus a similar amount of shipping fluid and ink would be ejected into their respective maintenance cartridges?

However it does imply that volume printers will be forever buying maintenance cartridges as they fill quickly?   Perhaps as Mearussi has posted below a solution (please excuse the pun) is needed to reset the maintenance tanks and re-use them?  After all recycling is good for the planet and in this case the pocket!