Epson 4800 vs HP 130

Hi All,

I'm sorry for bringing this up again but I looked at previous posts & they seem to be a bit aged.

I am in the market for a larger printer. I have an Epson 2200 with the Cavepaint Lyson CIS but would like to go larger....24" ideally but 17" at least. I want the ability to produce frameable fine art prints for display at work & at home. I was all set to jump for the Epson 4800 when I came across some postings about the HP 130 suggesting it might be a good alternative.

Has anyone out there had opportunity to compare the output of these two printers first hand? I understand that both printers have their pros & cons but I am a little leary of the HP in that many 3rd party paper vendors don't provide profiles for the HP & having endured the fun of custom profiles for every paper I use with the Lyson system I was looking forward to returning to the canned profile fold again. The lack of info on longevity with the 3rd party papers & HP also concerns me but then again it is 24" and some users seem quite pleased...

Any thoughts or feedback?

thanks
-evan



--
Fuji S2 etc.

http://www.pbase.com/eheffa

Evan,

I have no experience with the Epson 4800 so I will not address a comparison. I can only tell you that I have just recently printed up a large number of photos (56) for an exhibit with the DJ 130. I used HP Premium Photo Plus Satin(24" roll) with the supplied print profiles. The prints have received nothing but rave reviews.

The plus sides for me have been the ease of use after getting through some technical set up misunderstandings. Support from the HP technical support staff. The miserly use of ink. And, of course, the fabulous professional level prints.

The down sides I've experienced are that it is a noisey printer and very slow.

I did purchase the roller option and automatic cutter.

Finally, there are some great member's on this forum who have extensive experience with the DJ 130 are willingly provide help.
--
David Gordon

Read this thread. All about HP and Epsons and how nobody has made the perfect printer yet.

i thought the designjet series were much faster than the epsons??

b

Thanks for the reply,

I am intrigued by the possibility of having high quality prints at 24". I understand that the printer actually produces 23.5" print area at this size....does it do borderless prints at smaller sizes?

Hvae you tried any 3rd party papers?

Thanks again.

-evan

fotodiver said:

Evan,

I have no experience with the Epson 4800 so I will not address a
comparison. I can only tell you that I have just recently printed
up a large number of photos (56) for an exhibit with the DJ 130. I
used HP Premium Photo Plus Satin(24" roll) with the supplied print
profiles. The prints have received nothing but rave reviews.

The plus sides for me have been the ease of use after getting
through some technical set up misunderstandings. Support from the
HP technical support staff. The miserly use of ink. And, of
course, the fabulous professional level prints.

The down sides I've experienced are that it is a noisey printer and
very slow.

I did purchase the roller option and automatic cutter.

Finally, there are some great member's on this forum who have
extensive experience with the DJ 130 are willingly provide help.
--
David Gordon

Click to expand...

--
Fuji S2 etc.

http://www.pbase.com/eheffa

Hi birwin...do you still have this link?

-evan

birwin said:

Read this thread. All about HP and Epsons and how nobody has made
the perfect printer yet.

Click to expand...

--
Fuji S2 etc.

http://www.pbase.com/eheffa

No borderless prints of any size. If you get the 130, you'll have to cut them yourself.

Factor in size. The HP is 24"...that takes longer.

Evan Effa said:

I am in the market for a larger printer. I have an Epson 2200 with
the Cavepaint Lyson CIS but would like to go larger....24" ideally
but 17" at least. I want the ability to produce frameable fine art
prints for display at work & at home. I was all set to jump for
the Epson 4800 when I came across some postings about the HP 130
suggesting it might be a good alternative.

Click to expand...

For fine art framed and carefully mounted, the HP DJ color prints rival the lightfastness of all Epson UC color prints when using the correct paper.

When it comes to matte most people forget that lightfastness isn't durability of the paper, simply the inks themselves on the paper. Many papers actually will die a sudden death long before the inks fade.
If you are to print museum prints on matte Epson is the only answer.
IF you print color for museums both Epson and HP are equal on other than matte.

In terms of image quality the HP is slightly higher than the Epson in some areas such as depth , Drange the Epson can not touch under any condition or media.

Evan Effa said:

Has anyone out there had opportunity to compare the output of these
two printers first hand? I understand that both printers have
their pros & cons but I am a little leary of the HP in that many
3rd party paper vendors don't provide profiles for the HP & having
endured the fun of custom profiles for every paper I use with the
Lyson system I was looking forward to returning to the canned
profile fold again. The lack of info on longevity with the 3rd
party papers & HP also concerns me but then again it is 24" and
some users seem quite pleased...

Click to expand...

I've got quite a few examples here from the 4800, and a lot more on 7600 and 4000 and the 2200.

Epson have corrected most of their weak areas the best they could. The drivers are now better, the greys quite nice, there is even a slight reduction in gloss uniformity differential.

The HP is still the cheapest to run, the cheapest to buy, no rip needed, easy to configure and use, smallest footprint, replaceable heads, auto calibration, etc etc.

IF you change papers a lot then yes there is extensive support for Epson. HP have just tested and released a slew of profiles for fine art.
http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?objectID=c00415089

True the HP papers are really and truly the optimal paper for these printers. It does amazing things on the Glossy and the Satin. I really like Hahnemuhle 308 for matte.

If you don't use many papers custom profiles are the way to go. I also edit rgb color profiles for excellent B&W output.

So a great printer for little cost that can certainly do some things that no others can still produces better photographic output on Satin or Glossy on side by side comparisons.
--
Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com

Thank you Neil for your detailed feedback.

Here in Victoria it seems difficult to find & view output from these different printers first hand.

The FLAAR reports hint at the idea that the HP 130 might outperform an Epson 7600 on some fronts but you have to pay ~$120 USD to view their conclusions ( %^&# @$ DRAT) Have you seen these reports & if so, would you be able to share their conclusion with us?

I have to agree that for the money the HP looks like a winner in a comparison to the 4800 but I hate spending this kind of dough on faith...

I have had to use custom profiles with the Lyson Inks so could do that again if necessay I guess....( I do have access to a high end GM Eye-one system on the odd occasion). I have to say that I have a soft spot for Enhanced matte images with the Matte ink for the 2200 & really miss that with the Lyson Cave Paint setup I have. Can the 130 Print to this sort of matt stock with some longevity? How does it compare in terms of Dmax or smoothness of transitions?

I have reviewd many of your posts. Thank you for taking the time to discuss these issues.

-evan

colourgeek said:

I've got quite a few examples here from the 4800, and a lot more on
7600 and 4000 and the 2200.
Epson have corrected most of their weak areas the best they could.
The drivers are now better, the greys quite nice, there is even a
slight reduction in gloss uniformity differential.

The HP is still the cheapest to run, the cheapest to buy, no rip
needed, easy to configure and use, smallest footprint, replaceable
heads, auto calibration, etc etc.

IF you change papers a lot then yes there is extensive support for
Epson. HP have just tested and released a slew of profiles for fine
art.
http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?objectID=c00415089

True the HP papers are really and truly the optimal paper for these
printers. It does amazing things on the Glossy and the Satin. I
really like Hahnemuhle 308 for matte.

If you don't use many papers custom profiles are the way to go. I
also edit rgb color profiles for excellent B&W output.
So a great printer for little cost that can certainly do some
things that no others can still produces better photographic output
on Satin or Glossy on side by side comparisons.
--
Neil Snape photographer Paris
http://www.neilsnape.com

Click to expand...

--
Fuji S2 etc.

http://www.pbase.com/eheffa

It is the 24" model. Isn't that the one you should compare?

I can't offer you much advice because I have no experience with HP printers. I'm moving from a 2200 to a 7800. If I'm lucky, I'll be getting it this coming week. If not, in early Oct.

Robin
http://www.robincasady.com

Evan Effa said:

Here in Victoria it seems difficult to find & view output from
these different printers first hand.

Click to expand...

On the pro printers it's difficult to have a comparison print made anywhere, let alone side by side.

IF you need a print of your picture on a 130, just contact me, it's no problem. I am in touch with many Epson users, some of which are doing the same as I do> testing and dev of the printers like the K3 etc. We compare notes, and try to advise the makers the best we can as photographers so everyone will benefit.

Evan Effa said:

The FLAAR reports hint at the idea that the HP 130 might outperform
an Epson 7600 on some fronts but you have to pay ~$120 USD to view
their conclusions ( %^&# @$ DRAT) Have you seen these reports &
if so, would you be able to share their conclusion with us?

Click to expand...

I don't have any FLAAR reports. The conclusion of what I saw by Jack Duganne (do a google search) at Arles this year blew me away! He brought Cahrlie Krammer's prints of various landscapes printed and matted on A1 paper on many printers including the Durst Lambda, Lightjet, HP130, 7600, Dye transfer etc. This is where it becomes subtle. Obviously all these printers are good and have their own character that can show it's strengths and weakness when viewed together.

What the comparison revealed is the DJ has better dark tone detail, lager Density range, contone until the highlights, detail and separation over the Epson and more or less over the RA4 chemical process prints. What that tells us is when printed by experts such as Jack or Charles the HP is just that much more photographic, alive, and exceeds the expectations of photographic printing by a certain magnitude.

Evan Effa said:

I have to agree that for the money the HP looks like a winner in a
comparison to the 4800 but I hate spending this kind of dough on
faith...

Click to expand...

I always suggest all users choose carefully , hopefully with a print in front of them.

That said the 4800 is also a great printer that has many features for the higher price that are important for certain uses. The better you know what your requirements are the better your choice will be.

Evan Effa said:

I have had to use custom profiles with the Lyson Inks so could do
that again if necessay I guess....( I do have access to a high end
GM Eye-one system on the odd occasion). I have to say that I have
a soft spot for Enhanced matte images with the Matte ink for the
2200 & really miss that with the Lyson Cave Paint setup I have.
Can the 130 Print to this sort of matt stock with some longevity?
How does it compare in terms of Dmax or smoothness of transitions?

Click to expand...

I like EM too. It doesn't work that well with the HP. Hahnemuhle 308 is a true rag that has extraordinary repro on the HP DJ's. I just replied to a fine art printer who is very knowledgeable on printing and technology. Greg_E is trying to maximise the H308 for a remote 130 user. On my profiles I get a Dmax of L12-13 which is around the same as the darkest black of any Epson K3 printer period. Nice paper, can be matte varnished and behind glass should be 30 or more years.

So it's a beautiful paper for the DJ, and can be used for fine art as long as it's not museum printing.
It profiles very easily BTW, much easier than many other matte papers tried.

HP recently and continously test papers. Here's a list of the recently tested:
http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?objectID=c00415089

Evan Effa said:

I have reviewd many of your posts. Thank you for taking the time
to discuss these issues.

Click to expand...

Hope it helps users get the most of their photography.
--
Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com

The 7800 is a nice set of improvements over the 7600. You don't even need a rip any longer to get nice prints. It has it's place and so does the 130. They do different things , at a different price point, both do some things that are unique. Ideally If everyone could have both a 24" HP DJ and a Epson K3 24" inch it really would be a wonderful world.

Have fun with the Epson, it's a nice printer!
--
Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com

Thank you for your thoughtful & useful feedback Neil...
I have to run but will reply again further later.

-evan

--
Fuji S2 etc.

http://www.pbase.com/eheffa

Hi Neil et al,

I am very grateful for your taking the time to answer my questions regarding the DJ 130. ( I have looked at your website & resources & feel humbled to have received such carefully considered & good advice from a true expert.)

It would seem that the DJ 130 outperforms the Epsons on more than a few fronts....better Dmax & less gloss differential and probably more lively image quality but...having spent the last 2 years with the Lyson CIS system & struggling with producing good custom profiles, I am tired of compromising and feel ready to return to the standard Epson Pigment inks (which I feel were better than the Lyson Cave paint inks) . It would seem that the K3 inks are a significant improvement over the older UC inks and will print very well on my fairly extensive collection of Ultrachrome compatible papers. The question of longevity (esp with 3rd party papers), the need for HP swellable papers & a more limited set of compatible 3rd party papers as well as the longer drying time and potential for damaging wet prints in a cramped office setting have left me deciding to go for the Epson 4800.

Obviously there is no perfect printer. It is great to think that Epson will be getting some real competition. I do want to minimize my compromises. Perhaps I will regret my decision but I have decided to play it safe & go for the Epson 4800.

Thanks again for all your considered advice.

-evan

--
Fuji S2 etc.

http://www.pbase.com/eheffa

A choice of having just one printer is always harder when we know that other models/makes will have some features that make them unique as well.
I've always said if I had more room , I'd have at least an Epson and an HP.

You won't regret your choice, the 4800 is a fine printer that sounds like the correct choice for what you do. Neither would a user who chooses an HP DJ. Both can be appreciated for what they do well so the choice is one of which bias in printing you prefer> matte paper fine art style or true rich color photo repro on the photographic style Satin or Gloss.

The differences are not huge between the HP and Epson much to the disbelief of many ardent fans of either. Both have come up through a rapid pace of development bring true photo repro to the desktop with archival life exceeding prints ( toned B&W prints the exception).

One thing is sure, now you'll have a fine printer , it's time to go out and shoot!

--
Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com

colourgeek said:

snip...
Both can be appreciated for what they
do well so the choice is one of which bias in printing you prefer>
matte paper fine art style or true rich color photo repro on the
photographic style Satin or Gloss.

Click to expand...

Forgive my ignorance, but which is which? After awhile all of this gets a bit confusing. I'm guessing the Epson for the matte/fine art, and the HP for the satin/gloss.

colourgeek said:

snip...
true photo repro to the desktop
with archival life exceeding prints ( toned B&W prints the
exception).

Click to expand...

Are the toned B&W's not as archival?

colourgeek said:

Neil Snape photographer Paris
http://www.neilsnape.com

Click to expand...

I'm trying to decide on the HP DJ90 for my large format printer, but can't seem to get all the pro's and con's straight. I'm using a Canon i560 right now, and it's provided some amazing output considering it's price. B&W is an area I'm interested in, besides color, and the Canon is producing decent results, but I think they could be better. I am also considering the i9900.

I'm also a Satin and Glossy type of guy. Maybe becsuse I haven't seen matte, with the exception of Epson Heavy Weight Matte which I didn't like, or fine art images. Any additional information to help in this decision would be appreciated.

Hope I'm not out of line by asking this here.
--
Otto...

Otto said:

Forgive my ignorance, but which is which? After awhile all of this
gets a bit confusing. I'm guessing the Epson for the matte/fine
art, and the HP for the satin/gloss.

Click to expand...

Epson =matte, HP =Satin opr Glossy.

Otto said:

Otto said:

true photo repro to the desktop
with archival life exceeding prints ( toned B&W prints the
exception).

Click to expand...

Are the toned B&W's not as archival?

Click to expand...

No just th eopposite> selenium and platinum prints are in the hundreds of years according to H. Wilhelm.

Otto said:

I'm trying to decide on the HP DJ90 for my large format printer,
but can't seem to get all the pro's and con's straight. I'm using a
Canon i560 right now, and it's provided some amazing output
considering it's price. B&W is an area I'm interested in, besides
color, and the Canon is producing decent results, but I think they
could be better. I am also considering the i9900.

Click to expand...

I think the ouput on the Canon is as good as it can get on any inkjet anywhere. It has the color volume and depth that no others come close to. And speed at least 2x faster than all others.

B~UT stop yourself there> even Canon's latest dye inks are around 30 yrs behind glass. That's good but HP is 82-102 yrs and Epson even more. For me that is the bigger difference that sees me in the HP and Epson lines.

Canon doesn't do a true B&W and although it's acceptable the newer K3 or HP 8750 are mainstream B&W reference printers. The HP with ImagePrint or my custom edited profiles for B&W is pretty darn good, I dare say far better than the Epson UC inks as it's very rich black.

For the price if you are to print just your own piuctures but want the look of a darkroom print the HP is the way to go.

If you'll be printing for others, changing to who knows what paper and cardstock, 500+g/m2 posterboard etc Epson is the way to go.

Hp DJ is cheaper as an initial price, lasts and stays in as new condition as you can change the heads when you want/need> and it's the most frugal cosnumer of inks of any m/large format.

Otto said:

I'm also a Satin and Glossy type of guy. Maybe becsuse I haven't
seen matte, with the exception of Epson Heavy Weight Matte which I
didn't like, or fine art images. Any additional information to help
in this decision would be appreciated.

Hope I'm not out of line by asking this here.

Click to expand...

No not at all. The ideal thing is have an image printed on the DJ.

--
Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com

I just now read this thread. I purchased the FLAAR reports in the early spring before purchasing a wide format printer. What I read convinced me that the HP130 was the choice for me and I haven´t been sorry

my opinion:

I would trust what Neil says more than the FLAAR report.

--
http://www.dfaprinting.com