Epson R3000 if the rebates are still live.
Hits everything but reasonable cost for consumables, but then none of them do for paper and only some of the giant, highest end ones do for ink.
I'm very pleased with the Epson R3000. Got my rebate in a reasonable amount of time (around 6 weeks I think).
Nice wi/fi, prints to CD, 13x19, excellent B&W (one of the best I've seen), nice paper feed options for art paper, reasonable size ink cartridges, no nozzle clogging problems (and I sometimes go for a week without a print AND I live in Las Vegas with VERY low humidity), pretty quiet.
Hammy wrote:
+1 for the Canon Pixma series. I switched to Epson for a short period of time, too much hassle for color profiles and 2-3 times slower than Canon.
Back to Canon with 2x iP9000Mk2 printers as well as 4x iP4700s and 2x MP5920s - all fast, all color acurate.
what do you mean by hassle for color profiles for epson?
I spent more time (and ink and paper) trying to find the right color profiles to match my prints as to what I have on my monitor.
I'll admit, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to color profiling and such, tried a spyder once, but even though it said my monitor was 'correct', the prints didn't match.
With Canon, I don't think I've even loaded up the driver disk. Windows installed the default driver for it, and my prints come out looking exactly like my monitor... and did I mention that they come out alot faster too?
The beauty of the Canon 9000 is that it is easy to reuse the carts when empty...and there is some good quality bulk ink available to fill them. I use OCP ink with Ilford Pearl...lovely results. Ink costs about 10% of Canon ink.
My R2880 is much better with B+W however...although the 9000 isn't bad. Just not as good.
anthonygh wrote:
The beauty of the Canon 9000 is that it is easy to reuse the carts when empty...and there is some good quality bulk ink available to fill them. I use OCP ink with Ilford Pearl...lovely results. Ink costs about 10% of Canon ink.
My R2880 is much better with B+W however...although the 9000 isn't bad. Just not as good.
Going to have to try those OCP inks, if they are 10% of the cost of the Canon...that would mean I could reink for 10$ instead of 100$
RobertLynn wrote:
Going to have to try those OCP inks, if they are 10% of the cost of the Canon...that would mean I could reink for 10$ instead of 100$
That is what we pay here in GB. The inks cost about £4 per 100 ml bottle; but another big saving comes by reducing ink flushing cycles. I reset the chips when inserting a newly refilled cart, so the printer accepts it as new.
However, any time that any cart shows empty, I refill and reset them all, so the printer accepts them as a completely new set. This saves on the constant changing of carts as one after the other empties...and really saves on ink being flushed away.
mikek200 wrote:
Hammy,
Are you saying that you never calibrated your monitor??,and your getting a perfect match,monitor to print
Boy, that's got to be a first.
I have two 42" LCD monitors on my desktop that a super color accurate out of the box. Never been calibrated and yes, prints match with standard drivers for monitor and printer (with Canon that is, not so fun/easy with Epson)
I have to agree w/ Hammy. The Canon 9000 is the most reliable, low maintenance printer I've owned. Fast, great colors, cheap to operate, cheap to acquire, you can get ink virtually anywhere, etc. I scored mine on Craigsl*st for under $100 ea. The buy/sell boards are littered with them for under $200 as they came with a Canon rebate deal. Lots of people bought them, cut off the UPC, then sold them brand new. I travel with 2 of them and leave them cooking in an enclosed trailer for days (sometimes weeks) and they never miss a beat. My Epsons would never withstand that. Buy a 9000, you won't regret it.
Hammy wrote:
I spent more time (and ink and paper) trying to find the right color profiles to match my prints as to what I have on my monitor.
I'll admit, I'm completely ignorant when it comes to color profiling and such, tried a spyder once, but even though it said my monitor was 'correct', the prints didn't match.
With Canon, I don't think I've even loaded up the driver disk. Windows installed the default driver for it, and my prints come out looking exactly like my monitor... and did I mention that they come out alot faster too?
All I can say is my results have been looking pretty good using the stock Epson profiles for Epson paper or the Hahnemuhle profiles for their paper (for the R3000).
I have the iP4700's and 9000's, CMYK vs C-PC-M-PM-R-G-Y-K, 4 vs 8 colors and I can't honestly tell a difference. I've yet to print out on both printers the same photo and examine under a loupe, as I have the smaller printers for the rare onsite printing that I do and the 9000s stay in my office, but I think I'd have a very hard time trying to realize a difference.
I just went through the process of trying to decide on a printer. I got to see some sample prints, especially some B&W prints made with a Canon Pixma Pro 9500 II.
There's one on the UPS truck out for delivery to me. Right now there's a $300 rebate, making it $399 with free shipping from B&H.
