Re: best Epson printer for color?
- From: "MarkČ" <mjmorgan(lowest even number here)@cox..net>
- Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 14:50:27 -0800
Donald Specker wrote:
> It really seems that the extra cost of the new 2400 is mostly not
> justified if I'm just making color prints.
> The only choice then is print size between the R800 and 1800.
> Are 8x12's enough if you're planning on showing in a gallery? Probably
I'm not really sure what you're after.
You started out talking about being OK with 8x10, but are now talking about
gallery images. :)
Personally, I wouldn't want to be limited to 8x10. I have the 4000, which
prints 17 inches wide and as long as you want. It uses HUGE ink cartridges
(about 10 times larger than the individual cartridges found on the R1800).
While it seems rather expensive, it's not so bad when you realize that it
comes with about $500 worth of ink in the box. This makes the $1700-1800
price tag not so bad.
Once you get up into Epson's professional line of printers (which start with
the 400/4800), you're talking about a very different beast. They are built
to withstand the rigors of professional throughput, and are simply in a
different league. The fact that the 4000 is as affordable as it is leads me
to believe it is a good alternative for a lot more people than realize it.
You don't see these printers in stores, so many people simply aren't aware
of them. If you do a lot of printing, and want the capability to print very
large images, they make a great deal of sense.
Have a look at this site if you're interested:
- Prev by Date: Re: 'Test review of D200' by Ken Rockwell
- Next by Date: Re: Velvia and DSLR test
- Previous by thread: Re: best Epson printer for color?
- Next by thread: best film scanner under $1000