Epson R200 vs R300?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by 3in4, Apr 16, 2004.

  1. 3in4

    3in4 Guest

    Im looking to buy a new printer. I know epson rules the world as far as photo printing, and currently have an Epson 875DC. It
    does a wonderful job with photos, and takes my CF card. Im looking to upgrade to either an Epson R200 or R300. I cant really
    find any difference except the R300 is USB 2.0 while the R200 is USB 1.1. I could care less about this difference. I want the
    stunning photo printing that epson is known for, and the ability to print on CDs and DVDs. The price difference is about $70.
    Why is the R300 so much more? Is it $70 better?

    Thanks,

    Dennis
     
    3in4, Apr 16, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. 3in4

    denomolos Guest

    photo printing, and currently have an Epson 875DC. It
    upgrade to either an Epson R200 or R300. I cant really
    I could care less about this difference. I want the
    on CDs and DVDs. The price difference is about $70.
    Built-in memory card slots for printing photos directly without a PC.
     
    denomolos, Apr 16, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. 3in4

    Dan Eppinger Guest

    I had bought the R300 a month ago. After using it for about two weeks, I
    returned it and bought the HP 7760. In my opinion, there is no comparison in
    photo quality. The Epson placed a pinkish cast on every photo. Even after
    making some manual adjustments, I was not happy with the color quality. In
    addition, the sharpness was also very marginal. In my opinion, the colors on
    the HP 7760 are outstanding. Facial tones are natural and sky tones are a
    deep blue, not pinkish blue.
    Another annoyance about the Epson R300 is that whenever you turn the printer
    on, if there is paper in the carriage, it runs one sheet through as it warms
    up...Also, it takes a few seconds to warm up, whereas the HP is ready
    immediately.
    Do yourself a favor and check both printers out before making a purchase. I
    feel that there is no comparison in the results.

    Dan
     
    Dan Eppinger, Apr 16, 2004
    #3
  4. 3in4

    Gary Guest

    Well, I took back a HP5650 and got an Epson R200, which, at $100USD,
    is a smokin' deal for a true 6-ink printer with 6 separate cartridges.
    The 5650 was scratching the glossy paper, a trait that my old HP5550
    had as well. I got the R200 at Office Depot, but you can get it at
    NewEgg.com or CompUSA for about $100USD as well. Photo quality on the
    R200 is awesome. I tried both printers on 20+ different papers. My
    favorite is Epson Colorlife, but it only comes in letter size so you
    have to cut your other sizes to use that paper. A good source for the
    Epson Colorlife paper is DataBazaar.com (20 letter size sheets for
    $14USD, delivered). It's got a satin-like finish, so forget it if
    that's not what you like.

    The HP7760 is a 3 cartridge printer with 3 colors in two of these
    carts, and HP ink and paper costs will eat you alive. Also, Epson
    paper costs less than HP if you choose to use the manufacturer's own
    paper. If you don't, it's true that Epson inks will give you a pink
    tint on some papers, but not the HP. There is no point in paying 75
    cents (30 for ink and 45 for paper) for 4x6 HP print on their good
    paper, when you can get commercial prints from your images for 30 or
    40 cents each. My Epson Colorlife cut 4x6 sheets cost me about 23
    cents each for the paper, and the ink cost probably runs 16 to 20
    cents, so my 4x6 costs are in the same ballpark as a commercial print.
    Incidently, Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper runs about 15-16 cents
    per 4x6 sheet, less than half the cost of HP's good paper. You can get
    it a lot of places, and from DataBazaar.com for $14USD for 100 4x6
    sheets, delivered (or direct from Epson at $13.50USD plus shipping).
    Note that many of the HP papers only come in the obsolete 4x6.5 tabbed
    sheets. IMO, there is no point in paying 75 cents for the priviledge
    of making your own 4x6 prints if you can get somebody else to do it
    for half that amount.

    I also found that the R200 prints great on Epson Durabrite paper, at
    about 20 sents per 4x6 sheet. Ilford Printasia from CompUSA is even
    cheaper and looks good on the R200. I use it for test prints and
    throw-aways.

    The only real diff between the R200 and the R300 is that the R200 has
    no display, which is a total waste of money IMO. Who can really see
    what they're printing on those little printer displays anyway? It's a
    sales gimic. People that have printed any significant amount of photos
    know that there is always some cropping involved which is better done
    on screen.

    BTW, the front port on the R200 is USB 1.1, but it's for the camera
    interface (another useless feature IMO). The rear port for the
    computer interface is USB 2.0 on both the R200 and R300. There is no
    difference in printer-to-computer interface speed between the R200 and
    R300. Since some cameras are USB 1.1 and you're more likely to
    transfer images into your computer anyway, this is a non-issue.

    --Gary
     
    Gary, Apr 26, 2004
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.