mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I just checked http://www.wilhelm-research.com and those seem like hard numbers. If printed on the right paper and stored correctly (a universal caveat). Dye inks have come a long way! (Maybe Epson is right to have slowed R&D here: perhaps they're good enough already.)ampguy said:
...Mike
Rhoyle
Well-known
I just bought an Epson 1400 to replace my limping 1280. Price was also a big reason for my choice. Let's face it. Most photo printers are good. At a certain point you really start splitting subjective hairs. Here is my impression of the 1400 vs 1280.
1400 is faster and quieter
1400 has individual inks
1400 seems to only work well with glossy or luster papers, matte does not seem to
work well, unless I've not figured it out yet. I'll continue to search, but if
anyone has suggestions, I'm listening.
1400 does a better job with BW using black only ink. Despite only having one
black cartridge, it's a big improvement over the 1280 in this regard. And the
black actually looks close to being black instead of green.
1400 uses Claria Inks, which after checking the Wilhelm web site rates its
permanence at 98 years on Glossy and Luster papers. The others using
pigment based inks only are archival if you use fiber based matte papers. This
could be a bunch of hooey-we'll have to wait 98 years to find out.
On first loading the ink into the printer, charging the heads uses about 1/4 of the
ink in each tank. I made one 8x10 print and got a message that the cyan
cartridge was empty. Quite a dissapointment, but I took a chance... Removed
the cartridge, put it right back in and resumed printing. So far, so good.
Apparently, consequent changes of cartridges will not result in massive usage
of ink at $19 per color.
So far I like the printer a lot. My eye is not as good as some of the other members here and I wouldn't be able to see the minute differences between this and some other printers, but the 1280 was good enough for me to display in galleries, and my impression is that the 1400 is better. For the price, you can't beat it.
1400 is faster and quieter
1400 has individual inks
1400 seems to only work well with glossy or luster papers, matte does not seem to
work well, unless I've not figured it out yet. I'll continue to search, but if
anyone has suggestions, I'm listening.
1400 does a better job with BW using black only ink. Despite only having one
black cartridge, it's a big improvement over the 1280 in this regard. And the
black actually looks close to being black instead of green.
1400 uses Claria Inks, which after checking the Wilhelm web site rates its
permanence at 98 years on Glossy and Luster papers. The others using
pigment based inks only are archival if you use fiber based matte papers. This
could be a bunch of hooey-we'll have to wait 98 years to find out.
On first loading the ink into the printer, charging the heads uses about 1/4 of the
ink in each tank. I made one 8x10 print and got a message that the cyan
cartridge was empty. Quite a dissapointment, but I took a chance... Removed
the cartridge, put it right back in and resumed printing. So far, so good.
Apparently, consequent changes of cartridges will not result in massive usage
of ink at $19 per color.
So far I like the printer a lot. My eye is not as good as some of the other members here and I wouldn't be able to see the minute differences between this and some other printers, but the 1280 was good enough for me to display in galleries, and my impression is that the 1400 is better. For the price, you can't beat it.
Bingley
Mentor
Thanks, Rhoyle, for your review of the 1400.
@Ray -- Sorry, I see from post #10 that you already answered my question about the K3 ink.
Ampguy -- Fair question, I should have been clearer. I was thinking about the comment in #12 above about continued development in dye-based and pigment-based inks, not about the longevity of the inks themselves.
So am I correct in thinking that the less expensive printers that don't print larger-sized prints tend to use dye-based inks, while the larger Epson printers use pigment inks?
@Ray -- Sorry, I see from post #10 that you already answered my question about the K3 ink.
Ampguy -- Fair question, I should have been clearer. I was thinking about the comment in #12 above about continued development in dye-based and pigment-based inks, not about the longevity of the inks themselves.
So am I correct in thinking that the less expensive printers that don't print larger-sized prints tend to use dye-based inks, while the larger Epson printers use pigment inks?
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Bingley said:
basically, yes. although, higher-end printers have other features/enhancements (e.g., more ink cartridges, software, etc.).
ampguy
Mentor
yes
yes
In the R380 vs R800/1800/2400 you have 6 ink cartridges, vs 8 in the r800+ based versions.
The R380 uses dye based inks that last 200+ years, while the R800 based printers use 8 legacy pigment ink cartridges last < 100 years, so IMHO, it's natural to continue R&D on a profitable ink technology to get it to a level of a more advanced less profitable ink technology.
If you understand the primary color wheel, you'll realize that more is not better, and possibly more expensive, especially if the "more advanced" software is printing your pure b&w images with colors which the R800+ based line of printers are known to do.
yes
In the R380 vs R800/1800/2400 you have 6 ink cartridges, vs 8 in the r800+ based versions.
The R380 uses dye based inks that last 200+ years, while the R800 based printers use 8 legacy pigment ink cartridges last < 100 years, so IMHO, it's natural to continue R&D on a profitable ink technology to get it to a level of a more advanced less profitable ink technology.
If you understand the primary color wheel, you'll realize that more is not better, and possibly more expensive, especially if the "more advanced" software is printing your pure b&w images with colors which the R800+ based line of printers are known to do.
Bingley said:
amateriat
We're all light!
I've been working with an HP 8750 for a few years now. Prior to this, my printing setup consisted of a pair of Epsons: a 2200 for color work, and an 1160 with third-party inks (Lyson Quad Black Neutral) for black-and-white, because the 2200 was a dog in terms of b/w printing (and marginally better with color, depending on the paper used), with bronzing and gloss-differential galore. The following generation of Epsons (2400/4800/etc.) certainly improved on this a good deal, but still not entirely to my satisfaction.
The 8750, from my experience, pretty much eclipses all the above in terms of gloss differential and bronzing on HP's on Premium/Premium Plus papers, which is to say these problems are largely nonexistent. Better still, the resulting prints, if Mr. Wilhelm's word is to be taken (and I for one am taking it), have lightfast qualities within striking distance of pigment-ink prints. Which is great, because I've long preferred prints created with dyes to pigs, for aesthetic as well as technical reasons. I no longer regard dye inks as being a distant second to pigs in terms of longevity. Most important, the prints, both b/w (true b/w, with three black/grey inks and no color inks involved unless you want 'em) and color, are gorgeous. (And, no need to use a RIP to relentlessly tweak.)
I got my printer for well under $400, shipped, two Christmases back, online. HP has periodic rebate programs and/or free shipping if you buy direct. But check around online for a potential better price.
- Barrett
The 8750, from my experience, pretty much eclipses all the above in terms of gloss differential and bronzing on HP's on Premium/Premium Plus papers, which is to say these problems are largely nonexistent. Better still, the resulting prints, if Mr. Wilhelm's word is to be taken (and I for one am taking it), have lightfast qualities within striking distance of pigment-ink prints. Which is great, because I've long preferred prints created with dyes to pigs, for aesthetic as well as technical reasons. I no longer regard dye inks as being a distant second to pigs in terms of longevity. Most important, the prints, both b/w (true b/w, with three black/grey inks and no color inks involved unless you want 'em) and color, are gorgeous. (And, no need to use a RIP to relentlessly tweak.)
I got my printer for well under $400, shipped, two Christmases back, online. HP has periodic rebate programs and/or free shipping if you buy direct. But check around online for a potential better price.
- Barrett
Last edited:
Bingley
Mentor
Ray, ampguy, Barrett -- Thanks for your responses. These are most helpful. I think I can now do some more informed online searching re: inks and printer prices.
kuzano
Mentor
Ink Price Shock
Ink Price Shock
Check ink prices, vendors and cartridge capacity.
I happened across a new HP 9180 on Craigslist... just out of the box and ran the print alignment. The folks then moved and decided to sell the printer. Stupendous deal at $375. I bought it at nearly half the HP retail price. Incredible prints from the printer. Then reality set in. Cartridges were $33 per cartridge. Close to $200 a set. I did the math on prints I could expect. Sold the printer to a member of the local camera club for what I paid for it. Cartridges were also not in stock locally. I live in a community of 80,000, but merchants tend not to carry limited supply stock and high end supply.
I purchased a used R2200 from a local who found he did not do enough printing to justify the wide platform, so he sold it for $150 (and threw in at least $150 worth of glossy and satin paper). The cartridges are $12 and available locally.
Now, I am sure that the 9180 would have been better, but I am truly pleased with the output of the R2200, and ecstatic about the ink prices. However, I am also not sure I do enough printing to warrant the wide carriage.
I just set up a printer for a customer (I consult on computer systems and small networks). I set up an HP color printer which we paid $149 for and it kicked but on his previous Canon IP5000 and looks as good as anything I've printed on the R2200. But, the 5 ink cartridge are tiny and I think ink will be a shock pricewise, as this customer owns an art gallery (very high end) and prints out glossy handouts at a surprising clip.
My whole point here is to ask yourself the hard questions up front.
What format will you really use (not desire). How many times will you print over 8.5X11? Is the ink situation conducive to your actual need for output. Remember that most mfrs void the warranty on printers if you use aftermarket inks and/or refill cartridges. And, they can tell if this happens.
One of the printers I feel is very capable and affordable in the small format, reasonable dye ink category is the Canon IP6700 series. Two tray feed, good mix and prices on cartridge, etc.
It's a lot easier to justifiy a wrong choice on an under $200 printer that gets used, than a $500 printer that doesn't get used as it should. Then the ink and replacement print heads for unrecoverable clogs blows your budget to hell.
I'm quite happy about my good fortune in finding a wide (tabloid 13X 19plus) printer, with reasonable ink expense, but I worry that I don't really use the large capability.
I also know that some people say the 2200 does not do great b&w, but I do keep reading that other Epsons have captured the lead in B&W in later printers like the R2400, so that would probably be my next move IF I needed that capability.
Just one more man's experience.
Don't beat it into the ground. In the court of human advice, and with the myriad of choices, you can't begin to hope to make a perfect choice.
Ink Price Shock
Check ink prices, vendors and cartridge capacity.
I happened across a new HP 9180 on Craigslist... just out of the box and ran the print alignment. The folks then moved and decided to sell the printer. Stupendous deal at $375. I bought it at nearly half the HP retail price. Incredible prints from the printer. Then reality set in. Cartridges were $33 per cartridge. Close to $200 a set. I did the math on prints I could expect. Sold the printer to a member of the local camera club for what I paid for it. Cartridges were also not in stock locally. I live in a community of 80,000, but merchants tend not to carry limited supply stock and high end supply.
I purchased a used R2200 from a local who found he did not do enough printing to justify the wide platform, so he sold it for $150 (and threw in at least $150 worth of glossy and satin paper). The cartridges are $12 and available locally.
Now, I am sure that the 9180 would have been better, but I am truly pleased with the output of the R2200, and ecstatic about the ink prices. However, I am also not sure I do enough printing to warrant the wide carriage.
I just set up a printer for a customer (I consult on computer systems and small networks). I set up an HP color printer which we paid $149 for and it kicked but on his previous Canon IP5000 and looks as good as anything I've printed on the R2200. But, the 5 ink cartridge are tiny and I think ink will be a shock pricewise, as this customer owns an art gallery (very high end) and prints out glossy handouts at a surprising clip.
My whole point here is to ask yourself the hard questions up front.
What format will you really use (not desire). How many times will you print over 8.5X11? Is the ink situation conducive to your actual need for output. Remember that most mfrs void the warranty on printers if you use aftermarket inks and/or refill cartridges. And, they can tell if this happens.
One of the printers I feel is very capable and affordable in the small format, reasonable dye ink category is the Canon IP6700 series. Two tray feed, good mix and prices on cartridge, etc.
It's a lot easier to justifiy a wrong choice on an under $200 printer that gets used, than a $500 printer that doesn't get used as it should. Then the ink and replacement print heads for unrecoverable clogs blows your budget to hell.
I'm quite happy about my good fortune in finding a wide (tabloid 13X 19plus) printer, with reasonable ink expense, but I worry that I don't really use the large capability.
I also know that some people say the 2200 does not do great b&w, but I do keep reading that other Epsons have captured the lead in B&W in later printers like the R2400, so that would probably be my next move IF I needed that capability.
Just one more man's experience.
Don't beat it into the ground. In the court of human advice, and with the myriad of choices, you can't begin to hope to make a perfect choice.
Bingley
Mentor
LOL!
Kuzano - I appreciate the advice and the recommendation on the smaller format Canon.
I think my approach will be to search for a small format (i.e. 81/2 x 11) printer now that produces good results, try to develop some printing skills in that size/format, and then reassess needs in a year or so once I have more experience. I do expect to print both color and bw, so a printer that has the capability to handle both is obviously a plus. I also want to be able to experiment w/ a variety of papers.
amateriat
We're all light!
Kuzano: Some good points here, but I wanted to offer a detail or two
As far as formats go: I'd rather have A3+ capability and rarely need it, than need it one week and not have it.
- Barrett
Canon and HP printers have replaceable heads. In the case of HP printers (including the 8750) the heads are actually built into the ink carts. Change the carts, you get new heads. (Just as an FYI, I haven't had a single clog with the 8750 since installing it.)kuzano said:
As far as formats go: I'd rather have A3+ capability and rarely need it, than need it one week and not have it.
- Barrett
Last edited:
Peter55
Leica M5 & Summilux User
HP8750 for $350 to $399
HP8750 for $350 to $399
Hi,
I'm really into inkjet printing and have 5 printers. I have the HP8750 and I must say it prints beautifull color and also B&W prints all the way up to 13" x 19".
Some say it's among the very best B&W printers as it uses a tri-color ink cartridge: light grey, grey and black ink all in one cartridge. I use it to print my Leica B&W film prints.
Color prints are excellent and it prints portraits and landscapes so very nice.
I have seen the HP8750 for as little as $350 and $399 this past month, but you need to do a lot of searching to find that deal. I paid $500 and it's worth it. If you want it and if you want to pay full price of $499 then buy it from the HP site.
HP8750 for $350 to $399
Bingley said:
Hi,
I'm really into inkjet printing and have 5 printers. I have the HP8750 and I must say it prints beautifull color and also B&W prints all the way up to 13" x 19".
Some say it's among the very best B&W printers as it uses a tri-color ink cartridge: light grey, grey and black ink all in one cartridge. I use it to print my Leica B&W film prints.
Color prints are excellent and it prints portraits and landscapes so very nice.
I have seen the HP8750 for as little as $350 and $399 this past month, but you need to do a lot of searching to find that deal. I paid $500 and it's worth it. If you want it and if you want to pay full price of $499 then buy it from the HP site.
kuzano
Mentor
amateriat said:
Thanks for the added info. This printer discussion is like ordering fresh abalone at a seafood restaurant.... Priced Daily. Printer information and equipment changes so fast. I overlooked the print head in the cartridge point because the canons and epsons I have become used to are separate ink tanks from the print heads. Yes, the HP options do include new print heads with every cartridge.
My choice was also to have the A3 capability, but I also could have everything over 8x!0 printed at Kits, about a half mile from my home.
It's complicated and thanks for the added information.
Bingley
Mentor
Thanks again for all of the advice. After further investigation, it looks like either the Epson R380 or the Canon Pixma iP6700 would fit my needs at the present time. Is there an HP printer that is comparable to these too?
I appreciate the recommendations on the HP 8750, Canon Pixma Pro 9000, and Epson 2400. Probably more than I need at the moment, but good suggestions for upgrade time.
I appreciate the recommendations on the HP 8750, Canon Pixma Pro 9000, and Epson 2400. Probably more than I need at the moment, but good suggestions for upgrade time.
Bingley
Mentor
As a follow-up to this thread, I am now the proud owner of a new Canon ip6700D printer (thanks to my wife and daughter and based in part on the recommendations above -- thanks, Kuzano!). I've been trying out different papers, mainly from Ilford. I'm very pleased w/ the results so far. Obviously, as a small format printer, I can't print larger than standard letter size, but that's ok for now. I think this will be a good printer to learn on. I'm also looking forward to trying out the Canon ChromaLife inks.
kuzano
Mentor
I'm off HP altogether
I'm off HP altogether
If their inks were actually 3 times better, as are there prices 3 times more, Maybe.
I've been impressed by other peoples Canons. I use an Epson R2200 and am very happy with it, "regardless of the 5-6 year old technology". I have a semi professional photographer friend who very happily uses a "5 year old technology" R2400. He seems to be having no problem selling his images in the art market. If I printed more, and used more ink then I'd look at the Epson R3800. However the $9 cartridges (OEM) I am buying for my R2200 "6 year old technology" printer aren't breaking me up wallet wise.
By the way, Most of my cameras are 30 to 60 year old technology. My 8 Mp DSLR is 5-6 year old technology. I've been working on computers for $20 years and love the people who have to have cutting edge. I let them pay the R&D, and I wait for the "Sweet Spot" in pricing to buy. I paid $150 for my R2200 (low mileage) and the guy threw in $125 worth of 13X19 glossy photo paper.
Does anybody know if HP uses gold dust or platinum dust in their inks.
I'm off HP altogether
If their inks were actually 3 times better, as are there prices 3 times more, Maybe.
I've been impressed by other peoples Canons. I use an Epson R2200 and am very happy with it, "regardless of the 5-6 year old technology". I have a semi professional photographer friend who very happily uses a "5 year old technology" R2400. He seems to be having no problem selling his images in the art market. If I printed more, and used more ink then I'd look at the Epson R3800. However the $9 cartridges (OEM) I am buying for my R2200 "6 year old technology" printer aren't breaking me up wallet wise.
By the way, Most of my cameras are 30 to 60 year old technology. My 8 Mp DSLR is 5-6 year old technology. I've been working on computers for $20 years and love the people who have to have cutting edge. I let them pay the R&D, and I wait for the "Sweet Spot" in pricing to buy. I paid $150 for my R2200 (low mileage) and the guy threw in $125 worth of 13X19 glossy photo paper.
Does anybody know if HP uses gold dust or platinum dust in their inks.