I guess it depends on what you need. The obscene cost and inconvenience of switching blacks with the big Epson printers drove me crazy. The Z3100 is a vast improvement for black & white printing, which is about half my work. The greens and blues are also visibly better, and are more important for the landscape/nature stuff I print. The Epson reds are a tad better, but I'll take the trade-off. And for us devoted amateurs who don't already own a complete i-one suite, the built in profiling is fabulous.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122035\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Absolutely agree. I think the z3100 (at least pre-firmware update) delivers good results with the built in profiling (which I did try as well), and I really like that the printer has a process that calibrates each paper you use before you profile it, a challenge for those of us building profiles with Epson and Canon printers. For those that need to switch from matte to photo black, its a good choice (I believe better than Canon at this point in time).
The built in profiling .. does that really save any money? Basically, it's a built in Eye One system, so buying a canon or Epson ( or other non equipped printer) and a basic Eye-One system ... not sure which is less expensive. At least you then have the calibration system so you aren't dependent on buying an upgrade to your printer with it built in again.
Surprising you feel the greens are better, because that's where I think the z3100 has some problems for me. I loose fine gradations in the green, the result being a slight loss of detail in green foilage.
When I compare the two profiles, the z3100 has a larger gamut lighter areas of green, but the epson has a much larger gamut in darker areas of green. I really was surprised at the space of the z3100, because with the extra inks you would think they could beat the epson in almost every color and tone.
Still, a very good printer, and a good choice for those that need to switch between matte and photo black.