Time to switch from Epson printers?

[Norm Buchanan]

I have been using an Epson R2400 for a couple of years and had no serious complaints until recently - in fact I love the quality. Recently I started printing on heavier cotton-based papers like the Hahnemuhle photo rag and museum etching papers. Feeding these papers is a pain and often takes several attempts before the printer doesn't "jam". I have read that this is a common problem. I have been considering getting a 3800 for a while and now I am having second thoughts. Does the 3800 have this same issue? If so what printer should I be considering? An HP?

Any insight would very helpful.

Thanks,
N.

[coops]

Are you loading the paper manually from the back or using the paper feeder? I had the same issues but started manually feeding the paper and it works fine.

[Norm Buchanan]

Are you loading the paper manually from the back or using the paper feeder? I had the same issues but started manually feeding the paper and it works fine.

Hi Coops. Yes I am using the manual feeder at the back.

Kirk, do you know how the HP printers are with respect to neutral B&W? I am not too concerned about very slight color gamut issues but I definitely want neutral black and white prints.

[Asher Kelman]

If cost was not a difference then what would one choose for a 24" printer?

The Canon 5000 machine has lead to concerns about the whole Canon professional printer series. I'd like to hear some reports from people who use the HP's and Canons to find out where we are up to in quality and reliability.

Wanting to move away from Epson is a repeated subject of threads, so there is a lot of interest in this subject. What there's a thirst for is reports from the HP and Canon users.

Asher

[Keith S. Walklet]

FWIW, the 9180's paper path was insufficient to handle the heavier rag papers I wanted to run through it. I ended up with an Epson 4800 as my desktop printer, which has an adjustable paper platen and a paper tray that handles multiple sheets of the heavy stock with no problem.

[Ted Harris]

If cost was not a difference then what would one choose for a 24" printer?

The Canon 5000 machine has lead to concerns about the whole Canon professional printer series. I'd like to hear some reports from people who use the HP's and Canons to find out where we are up to in quality and reliability.


Asher

There was a lot of shouting about the Canon 5000 that came from a vary small number of people. It had a problem with its roll feed unit in the early production runs and Canon fixed it under warranty. There never any complaints about the 8000 or 9000. The new 5100 and 6100 have an improved black inkset. I've been running the 6100 side-by-side with the Z3100 for a number of weeks and differences are subtle but you can't say one is better than the other. The Z3100 is the absolute winner for glossy prints as its gloss enhancer totally eliminates any gloss differential/metamerism/bronzing. Having said that I just ran a black and white figure study on the 6100 that had shone some definite bronzing and gloss differential on the 5000 and it shows none on the 6100 ... dead neutral, too.

IMO the Z3100ps is the gold standard for 24"/44" printers but you pay a premium for this quality, If you don't need the 16 bit output and the control you get from the PS driver or if you are going to run a third party RIP then you don't need the PS version. If you only use a few papers and are satisfied to have others profile them for you or use canned profiles or already own a spectrophotometer then you don't need the Z3100. Both the Z3100 and the IPF 6100/5100 have software settings that allow you to print with the black inks only. Both have 12 inks. The Canon has its own 16 bit driver, not as much flexibility as a full RIP but pretty slick.

You can read my review of the Z3100 in the current issue of View Camera. Earlier issues had reviews of the Canon 5000 and the HP B9180 and there will be a review of the 6100 shortly. Both the Canon and HP printers have some loyal followers among the world's leading photographers.

[Lenny Eiger]

IMO the Z3100ps is the gold standard for 24"/44" printers but you pay a premium for this quality, If you don't need the 16 bit output and the control you get from the PS driver or if you are going to run a third party RIP then you don't need the PS version. If you only use a few papers and are satisfied to have others profile them for you or use canned profiles or already own a spectrophotometer then you don't need the Z3100. Both the Z3100 and the IPF 6100/5100 have software settings that allow you to print with the black inks only. Both have 12 inks. The Canon has its own 16 bit driver, not as much flexibility as a full RIP but pretty slick.

You can read my review of the Z3100 in the current issue of View Camera. Earlier issues had reviews of the Canon 5000 and the HP B9180 and there will be a review of the 6100 shortly. Both the Canon and HP printers have some loyal followers among the world's leading photographers.

I think the Gold Standard is Roland's dVinci setup. They haven't really pushed this as well as I would like them to, but they have the widest gamut and the smoothest printing of any printer out there. They have won every one of the Digital Imaging shootouts for the past two to three years.

They are also inkjet, and not thermal, using similar heads to the Epsons, which I personally like a lot better...

Lenny

[Lenny Eiger]

Hi Coops. Yes I am using the manual feeder at the back.

Kirk, do you know how the HP printers are with respect to neutral B&W? I am not too concerned about very slight color gamut issues but I definitely want neutral black and white prints.

I know this a question for Kirk, but if you want neutral black and white, you should use a printer with only black inks... Color inks can't compete - at least for most styles of printing... I like Cone inks myself....

Lenny

[Brian Ellis]

I know this a question for Kirk, but if you want neutral black and white, you should use a printer with only black inks... Color inks can't compete - at least for most styles of printing... I like Cone inks myself....

Lenny

That used to be true (unless you bought a $500 and up RIP) but not any more. At a cost of $50 QTR and Epson UC color inks in a 2200, 2400, 3800, and any other Epson printer that QTR supports are a great combination for b&w work. I don't use Advanced B&W with my 3800 but people who use that mode in the Epson printers that offer it say it does an excellent job as well. I used MIS inks for many years, QTR and Epson UC inks do at least as good a job with b&w.

[Lenny Eiger]

That used to be true (unless you bought a $500 and up RIP) but not any more. At a cost of $50 QTR and Epson UC color inks in a 2200, 2400, 3800, and any other Epson printer that QTR supports are a great combination for b&w work. I don't use Advanced B&W with my 3800 but people who use that mode in the Epson printers that offer it say it does an excellent job as well. I used MIS inks for many years, QTR and Epson UC inks do at least as good a job with b&w.

It depends on what you want...

I can also make a perfectly neutral black and white print - easily - from my 12 color d'Vinci setup. I often do. However, you can not compare this to a 6 dilution black and white set. It just doesn't hold up. The extra dilutions give you much more detail in the highlights and the prints are smooth, like platinum prints.

Lenny