Replacing my Epson R2800 printer

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Distinctly Average Senior Member • Posts: 1,206
Re: Replacing my Epson R2800 printer
1

Norm Neely wrote:

Distinctly Average wrote:

Norm Neely wrote:

Distinctly Average wrote:

Norm Neely wrote:

Sellwood wrote:

It's been faithful for several years, but I now need a wireless printer. What do you like for a 13x19 printer. I print 15-20 prints a month. Mostly Landscapes

I mentioned in an earlier thread to consider a canon pigment ink printer.

Before you do watch this link. Very important.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5by2Prg864

One of the videos in the link Ken53 gave.

That is why a dye based printer was recommended to me instead a pigment printer.

I don't print enough to use a pigment printer. 15-20 prints a month I might get one?

The printer you see in the video is.

Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 17"

Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 17" Professional 0608C002 B&H Photo (bhphotovideo.com)

Canon image PROGRAF PRO-300 13"

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1573781-REG/canon_imageprograf_pro_300_13_professional.html/specs

Both the same a far as pigment ink and cleanings cycles to keep heads from clogging.

Not sure why that video was so important to watch.

It was very important to me that Sellwood watch the video.

Quote from my first reply to Sellwood

"A Pigment printer is expensive but might be worth considering for landscapes."

Whenever I recommend or tell someone to consider a product. If I come across information that might be a negative, I feel obligated to pass that on.

Even though I think 15-20 prints a month would be fine.

That's a decision Sellwood needs to make not me.

The reply to Sellwood was a heads up.

We all know the cost per page is high with any home printer.

I worked in the industry for a long time, on many brands of printer. They all suffer from the same issues. Epson had fixed print heads which means that when they clog either the printer ends up in landfill or you were lucky and could clear it but at the cost of lots of waste ink. I know one of our workshops managed to come up with a method 0f cleaning them but it was not something a home user could do. At the time, other brands had heads as consumables or they were part of the cartridge. This made carts more expensive but if one clogged it was simple to replace.

Things have changed, the tech evolved and now heads are less prone to clog, waste is lower etc. However, cost per print is still high.

This bings me on to thirds party inks and even toner for laser printers. For some it is OK. However it also can lead to problems. First toner. We would see many issues with colour accuracy often leading to complaints. Works was destruction of fuser units due to the toner not bonding to the paper so well/ that could get expensive very fast as well as producing poor print quality, jams and prints that you could very quickly rub off the paper.

Inkjet third party inks have problems too. Colour accuracy is often off, particularly in cyan for some reason and especially so when used it archival papers. With some third party inks heads are more prone to clogging with low use printers. In many cases they fade after a short time too so customers complain.

So when buying a printer you do have to consider the use of third party inks carefully. If you are selling prints as a business then OEM is probably the best option. If you are printing photos as a hobby and want to keep them for display, then OEM is also probably best. If you are printing off lots of leaflets or more disposable types of prints then third party inks are fine, but for that kind of work you would not be using this type of printer. For general stuff at home I have a cheap A4 printer loaded with third party ink as it is just there for the family to abuse.

So yes, you should carefully consider what you buy. There is nothing in that video that most people don’t know already.

I don't know if Sellwood knows or not.

Given that Selwood has been using a printer for some time they would know how much it costs.

Cost per print is always going to be high at home. What you have to realise when buying is it is measured in a specific way that you will almost never meet. General printers are often based on 5% coverage while photo printers use a specific test chart. What is printed in real life will almost certainly not match that or even be close. You simply have to live with the shortcomings. For many home users they are better off using the likes of Costco for printing g as they do prints at considerably lower cost than you can do at home with quite decent quality. When you want a higher level of control and to use specific papers the you use your home machine of a good quality print shop.

Ps.

Been going over my reply, If I had said.

Before you decide to purchase, watch this link. Very important.

Instead of:

Before you do watch this link. Very important.

Your thoughts please.

Been re-reading my replies and yours.

I had been looking for a printer, received good info from another member.

I hastily decided to pass it on, in this thread.

I see now that was a mistake on my part.

Thanks to your replies. No more hasty replies that wind up being redundant info.

Promise! I'll give more thought before posting future replies.

Especially on a topic I know nothing about.

I'm planning on upgrading my color laser.

Thanks Again, Even though I now feel like a dork

I wasn’t trying to be offensive Norm. The premise of the video was IMO flawed, not your response.

As for your laser, they can be a bit of a nightmare too.

-- hide signature --
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow