Opinions on Epson Stylus Photo R1800?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by rbaker3, May 2, 2006.

  1. rbaker3

    rbaker3 Guest

    My Epson 1280 finally died after about 5 years. It would cost about $400 to
    fix, so I thought I would just buy a new and better printer. I have my eyes
    on the Epson Photo R1800. Anyone have experience with this printer?
    Comments? Is there a better printer for the same price or within $100?
    Pros and cons?

    thanks
    rbaker3, May 2, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. rbaker3

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Tue, 2 May 2006 07:48:53 -0500, in rec.photo.digital "rbaker3"
    <> wrote:

    >My Epson 1280 finally died after about 5 years. It would cost about $400 to
    >fix, so I thought I would just buy a new and better printer. I have my eyes
    >on the Epson Photo R1800. Anyone have experience with this printer?
    >Comments? Is there a better printer for the same price or within $100?
    >Pros and cons?


    I own an R800 and am happy with it. Note these are pigment based inks
    which can look a fair bit different than the dye based inks of the
    12x0. Look at some of the on-line reviews.
    FWIW, you could also buy a new 1280 from Epson directly for $300
    counting a $100 mail in rebate.
    http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&oid=28907797
    ________________________________________________________
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    http://EdwardGRuf.com
    Ed Ruf, May 2, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "rbaker3" <> wrote:
    >My Epson 1280 finally died after about 5 years. It would cost about $400 to
    >fix, so I thought I would just buy a new and better printer. I have my eyes
    >on the Epson Photo R1800. Anyone have experience with this printer?
    >Comments? Is there a better printer for the same price or within $100?
    >Pros and cons?


    Use Epson ink, and use it *every* day.

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
    Floyd L. Davidson, May 2, 2006
    #3
  4. rbaker3

    rbaker3 Guest

    Thanks. I noticed that rebate. I loved my 1280, but I have been wanting to
    upgrade for sometime now to something better. Spending a couple hundred
    more for something better with higher resolution, archival inks, better
    prints in general supposedly, etc is worth it.


    "Ed Ruf" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 2 May 2006 07:48:53 -0500, in rec.photo.digital "rbaker3"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>My Epson 1280 finally died after about 5 years. It would cost about $400
    >>to
    >>fix, so I thought I would just buy a new and better printer. I have my
    >>eyes
    >>on the Epson Photo R1800. Anyone have experience with this printer?
    >>Comments? Is there a better printer for the same price or within $100?
    >>Pros and cons?

    >
    > I own an R800 and am happy with it. Note these are pigment based inks
    > which can look a fair bit different than the dye based inks of the
    > 12x0. Look at some of the on-line reviews.
    > FWIW, you could also buy a new 1280 from Epson directly for $300
    > counting a $100 mail in rebate.
    > http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&oid=28907797
    > ________________________________________________________
    > Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    > http://EdwardGRuf.com
    rbaker3, May 2, 2006
    #4
  5. rbaker3

    bmoag Guest

    Funny you should ask.
    My 1280 died and I got an r1800.
    I got the 1280 fixed--replacing the print head was about half the cost of a
    new 1280 (did you have the blue lines of death?). This was a sentimental and
    not a wise economic decision.
    In truth side by side print comparisons show some differences between the
    r1800 and the 1280--as to which is better is a matter of choice.
    Print longevity is not an issue for me as I doubt anyone will care to see my
    inkjet masterpieces two hundred years from now.
    Despite what I have read in some reviews I do not see startling differences
    in color range, depth, brightness etc when prints from a 1280 and 1800 are
    compared side to side, but there are subtle differences.
    One caveat with the r1800 is that a gloss optimizer, which has to be
    activated in the print driver, is sprayed over glossy papers leading to a
    border effect such that you may want to trim the excess paper or always
    mount behind a cutout matte.
    At times I have been forced to print text with the 1280, not something I
    would recommend with the r1800 but not impossible either.
    I hope you calibrate your monitor and use color management as these are both
    unforgiving printers.
    bmoag, May 2, 2006
    #5
  6. rbaker3

    John Guest

    "bmoag" <> wrote in message news:CNK5g.81058$...
    > Funny you should ask.
    > My 1280 died and I got an r1800.
    > I got the 1280 fixed--replacing the print head was about half the cost of a
    > new 1280 (did you have the blue lines of death?). This was a sentimental and
    > not a wise economic decision.
    > In truth side by side print comparisons show some differences between the
    > r1800 and the 1280--as to which is better is a matter of choice.


    With some types of prints (e.g. monochromes) the R800/1800 runs
    rings around the 1280.

    > Print longevity is not an issue for me as I doubt anyone will care to see my
    > inkjet masterpieces two hundred years from now.
    > Despite what I have read in some reviews I do not see startling differences
    > in color range, depth, brightness etc when prints from a 1280 and 1800 are
    > compared side to side, but there are subtle differences.
    > One caveat with the r1800 is that a gloss optimizer, which has to be
    > activated in the print driver


    No it doesn't. The option to turn gloss optimizer off or on is in the
    printer driver.

    >, is sprayed over glossy papers leading to a
    > border effect such that you may want to trim the excess paper or always
    > mount behind a cutout matte.
    > At times I have been forced to print text with the 1280, not something I
    > would recommend with the r1800 but not impossible either.


    We print business statements every month with an R800. Text mode
    is excellent although pretty slow.
    John, May 2, 2006
    #6
  7. rbaker3

    rbaker3 Guest

    I just got the R1800 and so far I love it. It's a lot faster and quieter!
    I'm wondering what the difference is in the R2400 that justifies $300 more.
    I thought about buying it, but couldn't justify the price at the time. Only
    thing I notice in the description is K3 Ink.

    thanks

    "John" <> wrote in message
    news:1_L5g.4780$...
    > "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    > news:CNK5g.81058$...
    >> Funny you should ask.
    >> My 1280 died and I got an r1800.
    >> I got the 1280 fixed--replacing the print head was about half the cost of
    >> a
    >> new 1280 (did you have the blue lines of death?). This was a sentimental
    >> and
    >> not a wise economic decision.
    >> In truth side by side print comparisons show some differences between the
    >> r1800 and the 1280--as to which is better is a matter of choice.

    >
    > With some types of prints (e.g. monochromes) the R800/1800 runs
    > rings around the 1280.
    >
    >> Print longevity is not an issue for me as I doubt anyone will care to see
    >> my
    >> inkjet masterpieces two hundred years from now.
    >> Despite what I have read in some reviews I do not see startling
    >> differences
    >> in color range, depth, brightness etc when prints from a 1280 and 1800
    >> are
    >> compared side to side, but there are subtle differences.
    >> One caveat with the r1800 is that a gloss optimizer, which has to be
    >> activated in the print driver

    >
    > No it doesn't. The option to turn gloss optimizer off or on is in the
    > printer driver.
    >
    >>, is sprayed over glossy papers leading to a
    >> border effect such that you may want to trim the excess paper or always
    >> mount behind a cutout matte.
    >> At times I have been forced to print text with the 1280, not something I
    >> would recommend with the r1800 but not impossible either.

    >
    > We print business statements every month with an R800. Text mode
    > is excellent although pretty slow.
    >
    >
    rbaker3, May 2, 2006
    #7
  8. rbaker3

    Pat Guest

    I like mine.
    Pat, May 3, 2006
    #8
  9. On Tue, 2 May 2006 07:48:53 -0500, "rbaker3" <> wrote:

    >My Epson 1280 finally died after about 5 years. It would cost about $400 to
    >fix, so I thought I would just buy a new and better printer. I have my eyes
    >on the Epson Photo R1800. Anyone have experience with this printer?
    >Comments? Is there a better printer for the same price or within $100?
    >Pros and cons?



    I've had mine for half a year and am very happy with it.
    The resolution is incredible, the gamut excellent for a
    pigment ink printer.

    In truth it's the first pigment ink printer I've seen that
    does a credible job on glossy paper.


    rafe b
    www.terrapinphoto.com
    Raphael Bustin, May 3, 2006
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Brian Huether

    Epson Stylus Photo R1800 vs online printer? Quality?

    Brian Huether, Feb 13, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    352
  2. tkranz

    Epson Stylus Photo 2000P user opinions

    tkranz, May 5, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    413
  3. Kyle :o\)

    Help w/ New Printer - Epson Stylus Photo R1800

    Kyle :o\), Mar 24, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    578
    ::Your Name Here::
    Mar 24, 2006
  4. Rick Baker
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    3,868
    Ken Lucke
    Mar 21, 2007
  5. Ignoramus19259
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    775
    measekite
    Aug 28, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page