My Epson SC-P600 broke today, I need a new printer head what will be quite expensive, the printer is about 6 years old.
So I’m on the search for a new printer.
I’m using my printer for B&W prints, sometimes color and quite a lot for digital negatives.
My first idea was a Epson SC-P700, but I would like to hear if you forum members have some ideas and what you are using/recommend …
Thanks
Patrick
I got the P900 after owning a P700 simply to get the larger size. Great printer. No issues.
My P600 sits in the closet unused. I replaced it with a now-discontinued Canon PRO-100. Today I'd buy a PRO-200. Either of those Canon printers (dye inks) combined with Hahnemuhle FineArt Baryta Satin paper delivers results head and shoulders above anything achievable by Epson pigment inks in all respects except potential print life expectancy. Unless you love matt, anemic-black images. My strong recommendation is that, unless you're selling prints and worry about their ultimate longevity, get the Canon and enjoy an elegant, reflection-free surface that will likely last longer than most of us.
As retirement is coming this Augustus or next year, I’m thinking of selling prints and probably B&W panoramic. But we will see, going out taking images will be more fun then creating prints :-)Originally Posted by Sal Santamaura
Is that supported by any actual data? It is opposite of my experience. Wilhelm testing?
One problem I have with Epson is that with every system update of MacOSX I must reinstall the original printer drivers
My only comparison to the Canon Pro-100 B&W prints on the same paper Sal uses is to a now very old Epson R2880. I've used several different pieces of printing software and many different papers over the years on the Epson and, as Sal said, the Epson prints just don't compare to my eye. The closet I've come to an acceptable (to me) B&W print on the R2880 is with Epson Velvet paper. The blacks on this paper look black and the print doesn't have that anemic look of a lot of matt-type printing papers.
And for the record, if you use OEM inks in the Canon Pro-100 I believe the life expectancy is better than 75 years. Certainly not into pigment ink territory, but good 'nuff for me. However, I don't sell my prints so, maybe, 75 years wouldn't be considered acceptable.
Is what supported by "actual data?" Aardenburg Imaging, which unlike Wilhelm doesn't work for manufacturers,
has tested numerous combinations of printers and papers. It's pretty consistent that dye inks on a variety of papers produce prints with shorter display lives than pigmented inks. As for how they look, the Dmax of matt papers is always reported as being lower than glossy or luster/satin papers. The observation that pigmented inks on any paper other than matt result in excessive shine, making them difficult to view other than under the most controlled lighting conditions, is "data" from my eye/brain combination. I've no other data to offer on that score.
I did have issues with my Epson P800, they were repaired for 150€. New rolls were needed to feed the paper. But I’ve got enough times that it doesn’t run smoothly. Although a new A2 printer is quite a lot of money after 3 years, I considered a Canon because my friend never has problems, very bright images too. The A2 printer from Canon was not deliverable however, in my country at least. So I’m not that enthusiastic anymore about Epson and will look for alternatives when the time comes.
I'm sure there are some manufacturing variations that cause one thing to last longer/shorter than another of the same model, but my Epson 3880 lasted for only 3 - 4 years before it died. Not a particularly long service life for such an expensive printer, IMO.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks