Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > looking for a good digital printer

Reply
Thread Tools

looking for a good digital printer

 
 
wildbill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003
Looking for a good digital printer. Looking at the Epson 2200 photo printer
($700 retail). Have heard both good and not so good reports.

All assistance would be appreciated.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Savidge4
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003
>Looking for a good digital printer. Looking at the Epson 2200 photo printer
>($700 retail). Have heard both good and not so good reports.
>
>All assistance would be appreciated.
>


The 2200 is a love hate thing for sure. great quality prints but they take so
damn long. but just remember Rome was not built in a day hehehehe

Anywyas overall it is a great choice, the longevity factor alone makes it a
good choice.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
PTRAVEL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003

"wildbill" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:wWfib.4773$(E-Mail Removed) ...
> Looking for a good digital printer. Looking at the Epson 2200 photo

printer
> ($700 retail). Have heard both good and not so good reports.
>
> All assistance would be appreciated.


I just went through the same selection process. I rejected the 2200,
primarily because of the head-clogging issues I've heard reported. Instead,
I got a Canon i9100, which I love. It's wide-carriage, like the 2200, and
produces extremely high-quality photos. I got mine for around $525 from
J&R.


>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Bill Hilton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003
>From: "wildbill" http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

>Looking for a good digital printer. Looking at the Epson 2200 photo printer
>($700 retail).


I have the 2200, I think it's a great printer, especially if you need the
longer print life and want to print on a variety of papers from semi-gloss to
luster to arty papers with ICM support. The only thing I'd mention is that if
you want to print on the glossiest paper (PGPP) there's a problem with 'gloss
differential', but the Semi-Gloss is excellent.

>Have heard both good and not so good reports


I've heard a lot of good reports, very few 'not so good' ones, especially if
you limit it to people who've actually owned one.

The other two wide-carriage models to look at would be the Epson 1280 and
Canon's latest 13x19" model (i9100?). I have the 1280 also and greatly prefer
the 2200.

Bill


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bill Hilton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003
>From: "PTRAVEL" (E-Mail Removed)

>I rejected the 2200,
>primarily because of the head-clogging issues I've heard reported.


I've had my 2200 for about 15 months and never once had clogging problems. I
think I've only had to run one cleaning cycle. The earlier models like the
1270/870 seem to have had more problems, especially when people used 3rd party
inks, but the 2200 runs fine, even when I've left it unused for up to 6 weeks
while traveling.

Bill
 
Reply With Quote
 
PTRAVEL
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003

"Bill Hilton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >From: "PTRAVEL" (E-Mail Removed)

>
> >I rejected the 2200,
> >primarily because of the head-clogging issues I've heard reported.

>
> I've had my 2200 for about 15 months and never once had clogging problems.

I
> think I've only had to run one cleaning cycle. The earlier models like

the
> 1270/870 seem to have had more problems, especially when people used 3rd

party
> inks, but the 2200 runs fine, even when I've left it unused for up to 6

weeks
> while traveling.
>
> Bill


I've heard that the clogging issues are a function of how often you use your
printer. My use is strictly casual. FWIW (and not to launce a
my-printer-is-better-than-your-printer thread) two other concerns are
consumables cost and speed. My understanding is the 2200 can be quite slow
and is rather expensive to operate, at least as compared to the i9100. I've
seen the output of the 2200, though, and it is quite spectacular. However,
the i9100 certainly approaches it (and, perhaps, equals it). As you
mentioned in another post, though, there are more paper choices and ICM
profiles available for the Epson, though Canon offers two grades of glossy,
a nice matte paper, and some specialty papers such as canvas. I've found
that, rather than depend on manufacturer-supplied profiles, I get better
results creating my own by calibrating with Colorvision software (and a
Spyder to calibrate the monitor).

The bottom line, though, is anyone would be well-served with either printer.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Flycaster
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003
"PTRAVEL" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bmc2sh$ko8ns$(E-Mail Removed)-berlin.de...
> I just went through the same selection process. I rejected the 2200,
> primarily because of the head-clogging issues I've heard reported.

Instead,
> I got a Canon i9100, which I love. It's wide-carriage, like the 2200, and
> produces extremely high-quality photos. I got mine for around $525 from


Interesting. The 2200 is the one Espon printer I've never heard *any*
"head-clogging" complaints about, nor have I experienced this problem and
I've [very] occassionally left it unused for a month or so at a time. FWIW,
the 2200 caps the print head when it's parked, unlike earlier models.
Additionally, it automatically runs a cleaning cycle when you first print
after a long interval of non-use.

I dunno, but I think you "heard" wrong.




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bill Hilton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003
>>> I rejected the 2200,
>>> primarily because of the head-clogging issues


>> I've had my 2200 for about 15 months and never once had clogging
>> problems.



>From: "PTRAVEL" (E-Mail Removed)
>
>I've heard that the clogging issues are a function of how often you use your
>printer.


I'm sure there's a lot of truth to that for the earlier models (the other two
causes often mentioned are 3rd party inks and not parking the heads properly at
power-down), but Epson seems to have fixed the problem with the UltraChrome
inks used on the 2200. At least I've never heard of any one experiencing
problems, and I've left mine off for weeks at a time.

Most all of the people who mention clogging as a 2200 problem are people who
don't own the printer and are repeating things relevant to earlier models, I
think.

>My understanding is the 2200 can be quite slow
>and is rather expensive to operate, at least as compared to the i9100.


The S9000 and i9100 have a large number of nozzles (over 3,000?) and do indeed
print a lot faster than the Epsons. I'm not so sure about consumables ... ink
cost for the 2200 is generally around $1.50 per 8x10" print and the paper costs
vary by type, ranging from 30 cents for Enhanced Matte, 70 cents for Luster, 85
cents for Semi-Gloss and $1.65 for Somerset Velvet Fine Art Paper (at least
where I buy mine). I thought the Canon premium photo paper was about the same
as Semi-Gloss or higher? Anyway, the 2200 is certainly cheap compared to wet
prints of comparable quality.

>The bottom line, though, is anyone would be well-served with either printer.


Personally I think the i9100 competes directly with the Epson 1280, and the
2200 is in a different class, meant for those who need extra long print life.
I've always bought Epson (Stylus Photo, EX, 1280, 2200 are ones I've owned and
I'm sure I'll buy a 4000 when it's available) because they are always first to
market and HP and Canon don't bring out competing products until a year or two
later (I think the S9000 came out 2 years after the Epson 1270 and a year after
the 1280, for example, and the i9100 a year after that, and there's still no
direct competition for the 2200's pigment inks).

I think if I were buying a dye ink printer today I'd probably get the i9100
instead of the 1280 (which is to say I agree with you on the i9100), but I
still prefer the 2200 to either because of the multiple papers and the longer
print life.

Bill


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bill Hilton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003
>From: "PTRAVEL" (E-Mail Removed)

>My understanding is the 2200 can be quite slow ...


My wife was just printing out a series of 8x10's @ 360 ppi on Luster paper and
I timed three of them to see just how long it takes ... 4:09 to 4:44 were the
actual print times (~ 30 Mbyte files printed at 1,440 dpi via USB 2). I think
the i9100 is a lot faster than this, but under 5 minutes isn't that long to
wait to me. (Note there are three different ports available, USB 2, Firewire
or Parallel, and the Parallel port is about 4x slower than the other two).

Bill


 
Reply With Quote
 
George Kerby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2003
On 10/12/03 5:42 PM, in article
(E-Mail Removed), "Bill Hilton"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> From: "PTRAVEL" (E-Mail Removed)

>
>> My understanding is the 2200 can be quite slow ...

>
> My wife was just printing out a series of 8x10's @ 360 ppi on Luster paper and
> I timed three of them to see just how long it takes ... 4:09 to 4:44 were the
> actual print times (~ 30 Mbyte files printed at 1,440 dpi via USB 2). I think
> the i9100 is a lot faster than this, but under 5 minutes isn't that long to
> wait to me. (Note there are three different ports available, USB 2, Firewire
> or Parallel, and the Parallel port is about 4x slower than the other two).
>
> Bill
>
>

You know how ridiculous complaining about waiting five minutes for a *color*
8" x 10" would have sounded 12 to 15 years ago? A *b/w* 8" x 10" from the
darkroom would have been at least a half-hour, that is, if you had a print
dryer that would have cost you more than a good color inkjet printer today.
My, how times have changed...


__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
compuer nail printer nail art painting Nail Art Printer Computer Salon Digital Paint MUST HAVE arcade Computer Information 1 11-30-2006 04:11 PM
compuer nail printer nail art painting Nail Art Printer Computer Salon Digital Paint MUST HAVE arcade Computer Information 0 11-30-2006 02:40 PM
Looking for a good photo Printer. HELP!! SH Digital Photography 7 02-21-2004 05:57 PM
Looking for a good phot printer leo Digital Photography 0 11-15-2003 04:24 AM
Looking for a good photo printer Victor Law Digital Photography 3 07-31-2003 08:50 PM



Advertisments