Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Michael - Which one(s) to keep...  (Read 15745 times)
Frere Jacques
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


WWW
« Reply #20 on: September 16, 2006, 05:59:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Where! I have looked at a number of Epson Cartridge Boxes (for my 2200) and can find no indication of capacity anywhere. Nor is it mentioned anywhere on the cartridges themselves. Are you sure you are looking at the authentic Epson product?

Ron
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76481\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Right hand side as you are looking at the front of the box. (the cardboard box -- 21/2200 carts often ship with a second form-fitting plastic overwrap) I will post a photo when I get home today. It is not marked anywhere on the catridge itself.
Logged
Frere Jacques
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


WWW
« Reply #21 on: September 16, 2006, 12:09:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Photo attached.
Logged
RonBoyd
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 45


« Reply #22 on: September 16, 2006, 12:57:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Interesting. The boxes I have do not look like the image you posted. First, the part that goes from the front of the box to the back (the part that is designed to hang on a display hook) is at a forty-five degree angle rather than straight (90º) back as yours.

My boxes have a round stick-on label that says "Genuine EPSON Color Shifting Label" that looks similar to the same on yours. I can't tell for sure if they are identical because of the lack of focus on yours.

In any event, the side of the box is completely different. Mine has a statement to the effect that Epson is a registered trademark in several languages and an image of the cartridge straight on. Nowhere is there mention of capacity.

I have two different boxes (old and new?). One is deeper (twice as) than the other but otherwise identical.

My source for these cartridges were Atlantic Exchange and CompUSA.

Ron
Logged
picnic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2006, 02:01:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Me too...I held off on the 2400 and was seriously considering the ipf5000, but apartment living is definitely not conducive to large-format printing   The HP cartidge prices look to be half of what the 2100 carts cost...SO...I think I will be making a purchase in October!!

Now...let's see about turning the 2100 into a dedicated monochrome printer...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76290\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Today there was a thread on another forum concerning the fact that a number of people had received an email from Epson about a new Pro printer to be announced/introduced 9/27.  

To quote from the email text: (I did wonder who was targeted for this email)
"On September 27, we'll unveil our newest professional printer. We want to tell you

about a new printer that's going to get your adrenaline pumping, your heart racing

and your imagination soaring.


For starters, it looks cool. It's sleek, slim, stylish and space efficient. Think high-end

sports car.


But, it's what's inside that will really raise your pulse rate. This engineering

marvel incorporates several radical new technologies. And, of course, it takes
full advantage of our already industry-renowned Epson UltraChrome K3™ inks.


We've saved the best for last. Wait till you see the price. We think you'll be not

just pleased, but amazed.

So mark your calendar. Set a reminder in your PDA. And, put a note on your
computer monitor — SEPTEMBER 27 — it's the official release date of what
promises to be a huge new leap forward in professional printing.

This is going to be exciting. "

So--this may be what you and I are interested in--if its smaller than the Canon or 4800, newer technology than the 2400--and, for me, good mono printing and possible no swap of black carts.

Diane
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7910



WWW
« Reply #24 on: September 16, 2006, 02:07:35 PM »
ReplyReply

I have bought many Epson 2200 cartridges over the past three years, all from U.S. sources (including B&H, Calumet, Staples, and several local stores), and all of them have the slanting top that Ron mentions. The older boxes are twice as thick, and mention Epson U.S.A., Epson Canada, and Eposon Latin America on the box, while the newer, thinner ones mention only Epson U.S.A. and Epson Canada (although all of them are made in Japan).

Nowhere on any of these boxes, old or new, is the capacity mentioned.

-Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Frere Jacques
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


WWW
« Reply #25 on: September 16, 2006, 03:51:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In any event, the side of the box is completely different. Mine has a statement to the effect that Epson is a registered trademark in several languages and an image of the cartridge straight on. Nowhere is there mention of capacity.

I have two different boxes (old and new?). One is deeper (twice as) than the other but otherwise identical.

My source for these cartridges were Atlantic Exchange and CompUSA.

Ron
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76603\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Well, the front of the box says very specifically: "Printer: Epson Stylus Photo 2100", so there must be packaging differences between the 2100 and 2200 cartridges. You would think they would save a little money and have one box for both...oh, well...
Logged
Frere Jacques
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


WWW
« Reply #26 on: September 16, 2006, 04:12:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
So--this may be what you and I are interested in--if its smaller than the Canon or 4800, newer technology than the 2400--and, for me, good mono printing and possible no swap of black carts.

Diane
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76606\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

!
Well now that is interesting...I am glad to see Epson respond quickly to the challenge!

The French magazine Réponses Photo has a comparison between the Epson 2400 & the HP 9180 in this month's issue. The HP scores higher, mostly because of its technical qualities -- easy maintenance, larger cartridges, dual-blacks, low ink usage and lower purchase price. The 2400 wins on image quality, but just.

Exciting times!! I can only imagine what this market space will be like in 2 or 3 years!!
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7910



WWW
« Reply #27 on: September 16, 2006, 07:48:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Exciting times!! I can only imagine what this market space will be like in 2 or 3 years!!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76618\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Indeed!  And I just hope my Epson 2200 lasts another 2 or 3 years so I can replace it with something I'll be happy with for a long time.

-Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
OnyimBob
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 283


WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 08, 2006, 05:28:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Epson 4800 is gathering dust. I hardly use it any longer and will likely sell it.

The HP9180 is the most straightforward to use. Quality is great. I use it when I need to make a one-of print.

The Canon 5000 produces the highest image quality and is the most versatile, but the user interface is so poor that there are days that I want to throw it out the window. It's too heavy to throw, and won't fit through the window, so it sits on its bench with me using it, but cursing it every step of the way).

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76194\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Michael, just wondering whether anything's changed or are you still in training for the shot put? I'm still trying to decide between the Hp9180 and the 5000.
Bob.
Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4812



« Reply #29 on: November 08, 2006, 06:49:50 AM »
ReplyReply

The 4800 has been sold. I use the iPF5000 most of the time and the HP9180 occasionally. The main reason is wider gamut on the 5000.

If I didn't have the 5000, and didn't need 17", the 9180 would be a very reasonable choice though. It certainly is a friendlier printer than the Canon.

I'll have a 6 month update on the 5000 in a week or two.

Michael
Logged
thomasmoran
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 36


« Reply #30 on: November 08, 2006, 06:33:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The 4800 has been sold. I use the iPF5000 most of the time and the HP9180 occasionally. The main reason is wider gamut on the 5000.

If I didn't have the 5000, and didn't need 17", the 9180 would be a very reasonable choice though. It certainly is a friendlier printer than the Canon.

I'll have a 6 month update on the 5000 in a week or two.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84118\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Michael will you be receiving one of the new 12 ink HP printers for testing? If the quality is there I think this would be a perfect printer for someone who wants a no hassle way of making their own profiles and dealing with them.

Thomas
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4812



« Reply #31 on: November 08, 2006, 09:42:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I expect to receive a 24" HP Z3100 for testing some time later this month. I'll let people know when it arrives.

Michael
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #32 on: November 09, 2006, 10:56:57 AM »
ReplyReply

True the calibrations and profiles couldn't be easier.
Calibrating is a one button operations hinted or suggested at any new media set up, or any media listed in the presets that has not yet been calibrated. Profiling asks only what type of paper is loaded, and if you want Gloss Enhancer or not.

What to do with the profiles is less clear though. Menus are populated with the media set ups , and the profiles. If you use Printer Color Management , it will not apply the profile though , just a LUT. I'd like to see this change, but so far no luck. Basically one must use the traditional Photoshop Application color management and no color conversions in the driver.

Please be aware that the Z3100 is STILL beta and things will be changing often , and may even change quite a bit on a software +/or firmware update when all is ready.

There was a wonderful gallery at PPE in front of all seminar rooms printed on Z3100's. Very nice photography perfectly printed. They were so good the technique becomes transparent and all you see is the image, not the printing technique.
Logged
palderm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #33 on: November 10, 2006, 12:42:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Epson 4800 is gathering dust. I hardly use it any longer and will likely sell it.

The HP9180 is the most straightforward to use. Quality is great. I use it when I need to make a one-of print.

The Canon 5000 produces the highest image quality and is the most versatile, but the user interface is so poor that there are days that I want to throw it out the window. It's too heavy to throw, and won't fit through the window, so it sits on its bench with me using it, but cursing it every step of the way).

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=76194\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Michael, My Canon 5000 does the same thing. Iam in the process of getting Canon to take the piece of crap back. palderm
Logged
Dale Allyn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 225


WWW
« Reply #34 on: November 10, 2006, 01:59:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Michael, My Canon 5000 does the same thing. Iam in the process of getting Canon to take the piece of crap back. palderm
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84528\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Wow, I'm sorry that the experience has been so poor. I have a Canon iPF 5000 en route to me now and hoping to be able to get past some of the frustrations that some users mention. There's so little meaningful info available so far, that it's difficult to get excited about buying any of these new offerings.

Hopefully, Canon will be providing improved software soon. It's obvious that they wish to be in this space and I can't believe they're going to ignore the numerous reports of software/firmware complaints.

I guess that Monday I'll know what all the fuss is about, eh?
« Last Edit: November 10, 2006, 01:59:42 PM by DFAllyn » Logged

TiX
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 14


« Reply #35 on: November 10, 2006, 09:17:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Wow, I'm sorry that the experience has been so poor. I have a Canon iPF 5000 en route to me now and hoping to be able to get past some of the frustrations that some users mention. There's so little meaningful info available so far, that it's difficult to get excited about buying any of these new offerings.

Hopefully, Canon will be providing improved software soon. It's obvious that they wish to be in this space and I can't believe they're going to ignore the numerous reports of software/firmware complaints.

I guess that Monday I'll know what all the fuss is about, eh?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84539\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Have faith, and remember your experience may be different. I did, and I am glad I did because the output is fantastic, and I find the grumblings about the user interface do not apply to me personally. I find the software and the UI no worse than any other printer I have used, they are all cryptic and unfriendly. Myself being in my thirties may give me an advantage with non-user friendly technology, as I was brought up during the tech boom. Either way it is no excuse for poor UI, but in my opinion they are all poor, although still manageable.
Logged
Dale Allyn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 225


WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 10, 2006, 09:23:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, TiX, that's generally my attitude. I'm looking forward to receiving the printer on Monday, and like you, find many UIs less than perfect though serviceable.

I very much appreciate reading about user experiences here, but of course realize that those who are happily printing without difficulty less frequently post to boards like this one.

Cheers
Logged

Gary Damaskos
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111


« Reply #37 on: November 11, 2006, 10:21:51 AM »
ReplyReply

I agree with this! (and I am older).
Gary

Quote
Have faith, and remember your experience may be different. I did, and I am glad I did because the output is fantastic, and I find the grumblings about the user interface do not apply to me personally. I find the software and the UI no worse than any other printer I have used, they are all cryptic and unfriendly. Myself being in my thirties may give me an advantage with non-user friendly technology, as I was brought up during the tech boom. Either way it is no excuse for poor UI, but in my opinion they are all poor, although still manageable.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84581\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Dale Allyn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 225


WWW
« Reply #38 on: November 11, 2006, 10:24:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I agree with this! (and I am older).
Gary
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84631\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Heehee. So am I, Gary.
Logged

Fred Ragland
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 155


WWW
« Reply #39 on: November 28, 2006, 07:14:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The 4800 has been sold. I use the iPF5000 most of the time and the HP9180 occasionally. The main reason is wider gamut on the 5000...I'll have a 6 month update on the 5000 in a week or two.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84118\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Michael, in May you were hoping to do a formal review of the iPF5000 (5/26) which I must have missed (I travel a great deal) and on 11/8 you were hoping to give an update.  Although gamut is a strong positive for the Canon printers, there are many negative comments on the internet about the user interface, documentation and support.

We're looking forward to your review.

Thank you for the Epson 3800 vodcast.  You provide us a great service.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad