Best Small Format Printer For Ink Cost

[jacunivac]

I have an HP Z3100 and an Epson R300. I'm spoiled by the relatively inexpensive ink costs on the HP but the little Epson, which makes nice prints, is driving me to the poor house. I don't like to opt for using the HP for something like a 5 X 7 or 8 X 10 print and deal with the paper waste and the cutting entailed. Anyone have a suggestion for a small format printer that does not have ink cartridges the size of a thimble or refillable cartridges that don't print like refillables?

Thanks,

Jac

[SeanPuckett]

My approach right now is to just go ahead and use the Z for the smaller prints.  QImage's tiling isn't optimal but it does keep paper trimming down even with lots of dissimilar print sizes.  I take the roll output at 2x4 or 5 feet and run it through the mat trimmer.  I'm getting pretty good at leaving perfect quarter inch borders, or trimming off just a 1/16 for full bleed.  It's somewhat tedious, but the printer takes long enough to print that I can have one set of prints cut up before another set comes out of the printer.  

Not recommended for cards, though -- the roll curl is pretty much a deal killer.

I was just thinking about this a few days ago, though -- if there was a small format machine with the same quality output and supplies cost, I'd consider it.

FWIW, most of the greeting card and photobook output I've seen lately has been run off colour Xerox-type machines.  The output is good enough gamut wise, but the halftoning is pretty ugly if you get close.  Still, depending on your purposes, it's worth a cursory market inspection.

I'll be at the Toronto printing show in a couple weeks, checking all this stuff out, so the world may change by then.

Best luck.

[DarkPenguin]

Small printers kill you in ink costs.  (Or are simply not archival.)  So I don't think you can get there from here.

You might consider something like the b9180.  But it is a 13x19 printer (physically big enough to be a 17" printer) and isn't going to come close cost wise to what you're used to.  A epson 3800 might be a good option.  Of course it is still a small bundle to get in the door.

I suppose if the quality is good enough and you don't mind 3rd party inks you could buy an epson 1280 and a CIS.  I'm not sure that would simplify things for you.

[DarkPenguin]

As I think about this some more, didn't kodak announce some low cost pigment ink printers a while ago?  With some kind of "the ink for these will be cheap!" promise?

Looks like they've got some kind of cheap ink thing listed on the kodak comsumer products web page.  Perhaps you want to peruse that page.

[Ernst Dinkla]

I have an HP Z3100 and an Epson R300. I'm spoiled by the relatively inexpensive ink costs on the HP but the little Epson, which makes nice prints, is driving me to the poor house. I don't like to opt for using the HP for something like a 5 X 7 or 8 X 10 print and deal with the paper waste and the cutting entailed. Anyone have a suggestion for a small format printer that does not have ink cartridges the size of a thimble or refillable cartridges that don't print like refillables?

Thanks,

Jac
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Six months ago I collected the Euro prices per ML excl. VAT.
It may have shifted meanwhile but I think that the economy of a printer is more important, the manufacturers keep their ink prices in the same category quite close to one another.


0,91 Euro per ml Epson 1400 etc (Claria) 7,4 ml = 6,47 Euro

0,73 Euro per ml HP 9180 28 ml = 20,55 Euro

0.73 Euro per ml Epson 2400 13 ml = 9,44 Euro

0,45 Euro per ml Epson 3800 80 ml = 36,30 Euro   

0,45 Euro per ml Canon iPF5000 130 ml = 58,80 Euro

0,41 Euro per ml Canon iPF9000 330 ml = 135,57 Euro

0,37 Euro per ml HP Z3100 130 ml = 47,47 Euro

0,33 Euro per ml Epson 9800 110 ml = 36,38 Euro

0,32 Euro per ml Canon iPF9000 700 ml = 226,29 Euro

0,29 Euro per ml HP Z3100 twin pack 260 ml = 75,50 Euro

0,26 Euro per ml Epson 9800 220 ml = 58,09 Euro


Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]

[alain]

Six months ago I collected the Euro prices per ML excl. VAT.
It may have shifted meanwhile but I think that the economy of a printer is more important, the manufacturers keep their ink prices in the same category quite close to one another.
0,91 Euro per ml Epson 1400 etc (Claria) 7,4 ml = 6,47 Euro

0,73 Euro per ml HP 9180 28 ml = 20,55 Euro

0.73 Euro per ml Epson 2400 13 ml = 9,44 Euro

0,45 Euro per ml Epson 3800 80 ml = 36,30 Euro   

0,45 Euro per ml Canon iPF5000 130 ml = 58,80 Euro

0,41 Euro per ml Canon iPF9000 330 ml = 135,57 Euro

0,37 Euro per ml HP Z3100 130 ml = 47,47 Euro

0,33 Euro per ml Epson 9800 110 ml = 36,38 Euro

0,32 Euro per ml Canon iPF9000 700 ml = 226,29 Euro

0,29 Euro per ml HP Z3100 twin pack 260 ml = 75,50 Euro

0,26 Euro per ml Epson 9800 220 ml = 58,09 Euro
Ernst Dinkla

try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147495\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm not so sure every printer is using the same amount of ml per print.  This will be even more the case if the printer is used less often (aka more "cleaning" cycles).

Alain

[Ernst Dinkla]

I'm not so sure every printer is using the same amount of ml per print.  This will be even more the case if the printer is used less often (aka more "cleaning" cycles).

Alain
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The differences in ink laid down on paper are not that high. There are limits in the coatings to allow that and color + black saturation has to be equal at some point.
The differences appear in keeping the heads in condition and the HP models seem to be most economic ones on that aspect. Then there's the ink swap loss for gloss and matte like on the Epson 3800, reduced compared to the Epsons above it (but the 11880) but still taking a lot of ink. As the thread starter has a Z3100 I think he will like the B9180 as well, shares the same ink and heads (but not all), isn't expensive to buy and economic in ink use.  Ink price is higher than the A2 models but there's a wider format available already with even cheaper inks.


Ernst Dinkla

try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]

[Peter McLennan]

I'm installing an MIS CIS cart in the black slot of my Epson 4800 so I can test the CIS principle and try black only printing.

 A US pint (473ml) of ink from MIS costs about $50, so if my math is correct that's about 0.07 EU per ml.  That's about a seventh the cost of ink for a 3800 and a tenth the cost for an Epson 2400.

They're killing us.

[Mark D Segal]

They're killing us.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148123\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, that may be, but what do you know about the consistency of the product from batch to batch, its tested stability rating and the longer term impact on your printhead longevity and impact on the warranty?

[rdonson]

I have an HP Z3100 and an Epson R300. I'm spoiled by the relatively inexpensive ink costs on the HP but the little Epson, which makes nice prints, is driving me to the poor house. I don't like to opt for using the HP for something like a 5 X 7 or 8 X 10 print and deal with the paper waste and the cutting entailed. Anyone have a suggestion for a small format printer that does not have ink cartridges the size of a thimble or refillable cartridges that don't print like refillables?

Thanks,

Jac
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147414\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I print 4x6, 5x7 and 8x10 on my Z3100.  I use Qimage and tell it to "mark corners".  I then use my Bienfang de-roller to remove the curl and cut them in the Rotatrim.  I wouldn't want to print hundreds of these sizes but it works nicely for limited numbers.

[Wayne Fox]

As I think about this some more, didn't kodak announce some low cost pigment ink printers a while ago?  With some kind of "the ink for these will be cheap!" promise?

Looks like they've got some kind of cheap ink thing listed on the kodak comsumer products web page.  Perhaps you want to peruse that page.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147492\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Kodak introduced some consumer grade printers with a new head technology a year or so ago.  The design of the heads is somewhat innovative,  and reduced head wear significantly.  Basically a consumer grade printer that functions similar to pro grade printers - the cartridges are only ink, not a new head with ink like other consumer grade printers.

Thus the "ink" costs are cheaper, really meaning the cartrigdge's are cheaper since they are only ink.

However, while they lower the cost of the prints, they still have very small ink capacity, so the costs will still be far above a z3100.

One possible printer may fit the bill here, but it's a little pricey and may be too large ... the Epson 3800.  80ml cartridges.  I tired the r800, the the 2400.  I finally landed on 3800 for this type of printing (instead of my 9800) and have been quite happy.  For a 17" printer it's pretty small, and it's output is actually slightly better than the 9800.  I was worried about ink clogs, but so far with 2 printers I haven't had a single clog.

[jpgentry]

I recall really being concerned with ink costs until I compared the cost of ink to the cost of media (paper/canvas.)  It's pretty low.

That said I run an R1800 with MIS inks and an ipf8000 with 700ML tanks.  I use the PrintFix Pro to make custom profiles and I don't give ink a second thought.

[neil snape]

I retained the 9180 as it is in character like the Z printer, has big enough cartridges, covers better than Epson per image, and is small enough to keep a loaded tray ready for use at any time. In fact what I wanted was a tray like the 130nr or 90 has in the Z to avoid all these loading changes on roll printers. That is where Canon got it right with the 5000.

[Mark D Segal]

I recall really being concerned with ink costs until I compared the cost of ink to the cost of media (paper/canvas.)  It's pretty low.

That said I run an R1800 with MIS inks and an ipf8000 with 700ML tanks.  I use the PrintFix Pro to make custom profiles and I don't give ink a second thought.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148755\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Your experience is particular and not a valid generalization. The cost relationship between ink, paper and amortization of the printer is affected by numerous variables which would differ between users, machines, ink type and media type. I have written extensively about this using data from my own Excel-based costing model developed for the Epson 4000 and the 4800 - you can find those articles in Luminous-Landscape essays.

Mark

[Peter McLennan]

Well, that may be, but what do you know about the consistency of the product from batch to batch, its tested stability rating and the longer term impact on your printhead longevity and impact on the warranty?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148207\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mark, the printer is long out of warranty, the ink is reported very stable both in longevity and consistency by many other users and I have no idea what its effect might be on my print head other than the fact that no users report any damage on any of their printers.  

Personally, I've used third party inks in several Epson printers for over seven years with zero problems other than a heavier wallet.  

OEM inks are fine if you're passing on your print costs.  If you're not, ink costs hurt big, especially with a large format printer like the 4800.  Since ink prices are now a known quantity, I refuse to play the manufacturers' usurious games.

[Mark D Segal]

Mark, the printer is long out of warranty, the ink is reported very stable both in longevity and consistency by many other users and I have no idea what its effect might be on my print head other than the fact that no users report any damage on any of their printers. 

Personally, I've used third party inks in several Epson printers for over seven years with zero problems other than a heavier wallet.  

OEM inks are fine if you're passing on your print costs.  If you're not, ink costs hurt big, especially with a large format printer like the 4800.  Since ink prices are now a known quantity, I refuse to play the manufacturers' usurious games.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149018\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Peter,

OK, I was reporting on the basis of advice I received from high-end professionals who are not employees of any printer manufacturer or ink provider. However, what works works and that is good news. What brand of MIs inks are you using in the 4800?

As for the contribution of ink to total cost per print, my data base collected on just about two full years of output now says, using Epson ink and Enhanced Matte paper, that printer amortization (2 year economic life) is about 31% of cost (you can read my articles on L-L to see how that is computed), paper 26%, ink for prints 29% plus ink for cleanings and clogs 13.6%. The messages here are that the less the machine needs to be cleaned and declogged the lower the proportion of ink in total average cost, and it is significant; the shares in average cost for ink and machine amortization would decline with the use of more expensive paper than Enhanced Matte (which is just about all other professional papers), and ink is not the preponderant cost item though it is at least as important as amortization and paper.

[mmurph]

Thanks Mark, very useful information!  Well appreciated.  

Do you have a link to your essays? I will go look.

I ran a similar spreadsheet years ago when trying to decide between printers.  Now it makes my head hurt to do all of that work again.    

I havea  7600. I am thinking of buying a 7880 or a 9880. But I would still like cut sheet handling, so I will probably add a 3800 or 4880 to that?

Still 1/2+ year off, April 2008 at the earliest.  I am "retired" for a  while, about 1.5 years, so just doing general rather than specific planning right now.  I kind of cycle in and out of the hardcore tech research, vs. just making images. Also have to buy a camera in the spring .... 1Ds3, MFDB, 5D replacement, etc. etc.

Best,
Michael

[Mark D Segal]

Epson 4000 cost

4800 Cost

IF I were deciding between a 4880 and a 3800 I would select the 3800 if you want inexpensive and convenient media switching on sheet paper. IF you plan to use only matte or only non-matte papers and need roll capability, it would be the 4880.

Mark

[pollardd]

Epson 4000 cost

4800 Cost

IF I were deciding between a 4880 and a 3800 I would select the 3800 if you want inexpensive and convenient media switching on sheet paper. IF you plan to use only matte or only non-matte papers and need roll capability, it would be the 4880.

Mark
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=149055\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mark

This is the heart of the question I pose in the "Epson 3800 or 4880?" thread.  

Notwithstanding, in August you recommend elsewhere in LL to wait for the next generation Epson printers as you view the current crop as an interim generation.  I'm beginning to wonder how long it will be before a replacement for the 3800 will be announced (a 3880 or whatever).  Epson is now offering a $150 CDN rebate if you purchase before Dec. 21/07 a new 3800 plus $50 worth of selected paper (from a wide list). This effectively drops the price at Vistek to $1149 CDN (given their current sale price).  Is this usual for Epson on this type of printer?  Are they trying to clear stock or have sales slowed?  As the 3800 will, if I'm really honest with myself, suit my needs, this seems like too good a deal to pass up.  That is unless a replacement is announced in the next few months.  Could I wait a few months before buying?  Again if I'm honest, yes.  But there's that price.

Decisions, decisions.

David

[mmurph]

Epson 4000 cost

4800 Cost

Thanks Mark, *very* nice analysis!  Saved me a lot of headaches doing it myself too.  

In the past I never switched media from photo black, but I may be doing more printing for others in the future. I will have to wait and see what I am up to physically when I come back from retirement.

Now we need to get you to do the same thing for DSLR's and, especially, MFDB's.  Everyone looks at their out-of-pocket cost to upgrade to the latest model.

My 1DsII cost me about $1,500 per year for the first 2 years of use, when I sold it.  With 34,000 clicks it came to about $.10 per click.  I figured year 3 would be about $1,000 and year 4 about $800 based on 1Ds history.  

I'd really like to see the true numbers on a MF back. I'll have to ask folks for real world analysis.

Best,
Michael