epson 3880 vs 4900?

[jnmoore]

I've gone through 3 printers (R1800, R1900, HP B8850) over the last five years and I'm fed up. All printed beatifully sometimes but all end up spilling ink, wheel marks or constant driver confusions.

I decided to try a pro Epson but not sure if the cheaper 3880 is OK or should I spend the extra grand for the the newer 4900? I'm not sitting with a fat cat bank balance. I expect to print about 5 fine art prints each week. I prefer Ilford gold fibre silk and Entrada mat papers. I don't do much B&W but am interested to try some more.

Thanks for your opinions.

John

[howardm]

Unless you have need for roll paper, your requirements could easily be fulfilled by the 3880

[Mark D Segal]

ditto.

[loonsailor]

Also, the 4900 is much bigger and heavier, which was the tipping point for me to get the 3880.  The 4900's paper handling is more sophisticated by far, including roll printing and a different paper feed mechanism, but the quality of the prints will be about the same.

The difference between the HP (I had a B9180) and the 3880 is night and day.  You won't be disappointed.

[Alan Goldhammer]

+3 to the above.  I have a 3880 and it prints like a dream.  As long as you don't need roll paper it's the better choice.

[jnmoore]

Thanks everyone,

I don't really need roll paper so the choice seems obvious.

John

[Mike Guilbault]

Just to throw an opposing opinion in the mix... I went with the 4900 partly because it did take roll paper.  The reason I wanted roll paper was that it's difficult finding 17x25" paper... most of it is 17x22".  Only two inches, but it makes a difference when wanting to print 16x24" images. I know roll paper curls and is a hassle at times, but I just printed a 16x36" image and it's awesome!  I also use the 10" roll paper for cranking out 'production' 8x10s (not fine art by any means).

So if you really don't need roll paper, that's fine, but examine what kind of paper you're using (or want to use) and if it's available in the sizes you want to print. 

[jnmoore]

Thanks Mike,

I realize the 4900 has some advantages especially if you do a lot of printing. I print a little bit each week so the 3880 appeals more plus the size is an issue for me. Not to mention the initial cost, although the ink costs may level the playing field over time?

John

[Mike Guilbault]

I do a lot of production work, portraits and corporate stuff mainly (gone through about 5 rolls of 10" paper in the last three weeks) so the rolls made sense for me. The 4900 is definitely a monster (but very impressive when a client walks in!) and you need the room for it, especially since opening the roll cover means you can't place it directly against the wall. I also looked at the ink costs which were a little in the 4900's favour if I remember correctly.. but with the difference in price you can buy a lot of ink!  When it comes down to it though... the paper is really what costs the most, so you want to be able to use your paper efficiently.

I was also waiting for a 17" printer that didn't require the swapping out of PK and MK inks. I love printing on matte papers, especially B&W, but for my production stuff it's mostly Premium Lustre. This way I can move from one job to the other quite easily.  If this doesn't apply, or bother you, then the 3880 sounds like the way to go.

[Jeremy Roussak]

The reason I wanted roll paper was that it's difficult finding 17x25" paper... most of it is 17x22".  Only two inches...

Er, three inches, perhaps?

Jeremy

[Mike Guilbault]

ahhh.... of course... I was thinking of the 16 x 24

[mfryd]

17" by 25" is a common sheet size from many third party vendors.  I have been very happy with 17 x 25 sheets from Red River.

Keep in mind that the 3880 will NOT print borderless on 17 by 25.  The 4xxx series will not print borderless on any size of cut sheets.

An advantage of the 4XXX printers is that ink costs are lower.  if you print a lot, then this will be a significant savings.  If you are printing only 5 prints a week, it may not be an issue.

The 3880 will print on cut sheets as small as 3.5 by 5 inches.  The minimum cut sheet size for the 4xxx series is 8 x 10.

With all Epson printers you shouldn't let the printer sit idle.  If you have printed anything for a week, I recommend that you print something,  at least an automated nozzle check.

[Jeremy Roussak]

With all Epson printers you shouldn't let the printer sit idle.  If you have printed anything for a week, I recommend that you print something,  at least an automated nozzle check.

I can't comment on other Epson printers but with a 3800 (and so, I'd guess, a 3880), that's wholly unnecessary.

Jeremy

[mfryd]

I can't comment on other Epson printers but with a 3800 (and so, I'd guess, a 3880), that's wholly unnecessary.

Jeremy

I think it depends on the temperature and humidity where the printer lives.  I was away and my 3880 sat idle (and powered on) for two weeks.  When I did a nozzle check today, there were a bunch of missing nozzles.  A single cleaning was enough to bring them back.

it might be superstition on my part, but I suspect that if I let the printer sit for a month or so, it would be much harder to bring back clogged nozzles.

To my way of thinking, a weekly nozzle check is a low cost way of reducing and detecting clogs.  I look at it this way - even if it didn't help at all, the cost is very low.  And if I do get a clog, I notice it before it has a chance to become a bigger (and more congealed) clog.

[Randy Carone]

Gotta agree with kakashi on this. I can leave my 3800 off for 4 weeks, turn it on, print a test print and no clogs. I've had my 3800 (refurb) since Oct 2009 and have had one clog on four yellow nozzles and a simple manual clean got the nozzles back. Your supposition may apply to all other Epson printers but the 3800/3880 seem to be unique in the Epson line. As many have said - it is the least clogging printer that Epson has ever produced.

[mfryd]

Gotta agree with kakashi on this. I can leave my 3800 off for 4 weeks, turn it on, print a test print and no clogs. I've had my 3800 (refurb) since Oct 2009 and have had one clog on four yellow nozzles and a simple manual clean got the nozzles back. Your supposition may apply to all other Epson printers but the 3800/3880 seem to be unique in the Epson line. As many have said - it is the least clogging printer that Epson has ever produced.

I don't doubt that you can leave your 3800 off for 4 weeks and not have a clog.  I think that a lot depends on the temperature and humidity where your printer is located.

I do know that I let my 3880 sit for 2 weeks, and when I ran a nozzle check it needed a cleaning.

I do agree that the 3800 and 3880 seem to be much better than any other Epson I have every had.

I just think that for some of us, a preventative weekly nozzle check can help, and for the rest of us, it doesn't really hurt.

[Alan Goldhammer]

Everyone reports different experiences with different printers.  I've had a 3880 for 16 months now and never had a clog.  I've gone for periods of 6 weeks without printing a single thing, followed by frantic activity when I'm printing every day.  The printer is so reliable that I often forget to do a nozzle check.  Printer is sitting on the ground floor of the house and subject to temperature extremes ranging from 17C (winter) to 25.5C in the summer.  Humidity in the winter maybe 30%, summer more like over 50%.  Go figure.

[jnmoore]

Thanks for the info everyone.

Picking up my 3880 tomorrow from NCIX locally for $1194.99 plus tax. Vistek was lower at $1149 but not after adding $70.16 shipping.

Decided to not purchase a RIP but to try the simpler approach first.

John
johnagon.com

[mfryd]

If you are located in the United States, B&H Photo has the Epson 3880 for $1,149 with free shipping. If you are not in New York they will not charge you sales tax.


B&H is a reliable source for photo and other gear.

[Mike Guilbault]

Congrats on 3880.  From what you've told us, I'm sure it'll work out great for you.