Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Epson 1280: How's it against today's printers?  (Read 3605 times)
lbergman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« on: November 10, 2006, 01:29:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Now that I've finally aquired an Epson 1280 printer from a friend, I'm just kind of curious what people's opinions are on how it stacks up against the newest breed of printers out there (like the HP B9180, Canon 5000, etc).  Even though the 1280 is still a current model, it is getting a little long in the tooth, but considering my previous printer was (and still use) is a HP 7150, this is a step up for me.  Of course, just because a newer model comes out doesn't mean the older one starts working worse, but are the newest printers a lot better in the areas of print quality and achievability?  For reference, I'm planning on using Epson inks and papers, but also looking at some of the offerings from Red River Paper like the UltraPro Satin and UltraPro Gloss.

Any comments or thoughts? Michael (if you ever used a 1280)?  
Logged
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2006, 12:10:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
... are the newest printers a lot better in the areas of print quality and achievability? 

Yes, color accuracy, dynamic range, media compatibility and archival longevity are all significantly better.
Logged
Dale_Cotton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2006, 08:21:12 AM »
ReplyReply

The 1280 uses dye inks, which have wonderful deep dark blacks. All the newer models of Epson wide carriage printers use pigment inks, which have lots of associated problems - or at least growing pains - including blacks and clogging.

There are two downsides to the 1280 and its dye inks. One is that the prints are not expected to last terribly long before fading or discolouring. (But if you use Epson ColorLife paper, I believe the prediction is over 30 years.) The other is the problem getting an accurate match between print colours and what you see on the monitor. The colour match issue really depends on the particular unit you have. If you're lucky, your unit will give you a good match and this won't be an issue for you.

... OTOH, it may turn out that you try all the available settings on your 1280 and still can't get rid of some colour problem even on Epson paper, such as the yellow cast I was getting. In that case, pouring more money into it will be like flushing your money down the toilet. Been there; done that.

I suggest you try printing in the sRGB colour space, cross your fingers that you'll get a good colour match from your 1280, and don't sweat either the print longevity issue or the incremental increase in detail and vividness a more recent printer might provide. Ten years from now you can look back over your output, decide which dozen or two deserve to be preserved for the ages, have those professionally printed ... and enjoy the several thousand extra dollars in your bank account that you've saved from not obsessing over printers, paper, and ink.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2006, 08:26:41 AM by Dale Cotton » Logged
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6843


« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2006, 08:34:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Now that I've finally aquired an Epson 1280 printer from a friend, I'm just kind of curious what people's opinions are on how it stacks up against the newest breed of printers out there (like the HP B9180, Canon 5000, etc).  Even though the 1280 is still a current model, it is getting a little long in the tooth, but considering my previous printer was (and still use) is a HP 7150, this is a step up for me.  Of course, just because a newer model comes out doesn't mean the older one starts working worse, but are the newest printers a lot better in the areas of print quality and achievability?  For reference, I'm planning on using Epson inks and papers, but also looking at some of the offerings from Red River Paper like the UltraPro Satin and UltraPro Gloss.

Any comments or thoughts? Michael (if you ever used a 1280)? 
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You can find Michael's review [a href=\"http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/1280.shtml]here[/url].
Logged

Francois
lbergman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2006, 01:41:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, guys!

I should mention I plan on doing a fair amount of B&W printing, maybe to the tune of around a third of all my printing.  So if the 1280 holds it's own on those, that's definitely a plus!

I did a real quick (color) test print with the 1280 verses the HP 7150 on (Red River) UltraPro Satin, and so far the 1280 beats the HP as far as matching what I see on my LCD, but if I use HP paper in the 7150, then it's an even closer match. Finally got my order of Epson paper, so I'll see how the 1280 does on that.  

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the ColorLife paper is available any more (unless they changed it's name), so whatever the life is on other "standard" papers will have to do. Hopefully, they'll give me at least 5 years before noticable fading.  What is everyone's experience as far as fading?  It sounds like it's a problem, but given reasonable storage conditions (like out of direct sunlight), are prints pretty good for a year, two years, five years, etc?

The friend that sold me the 1280 did some comparisons between it and his new HP B9180 and concluded there is detail improvement with the 9180, but you have to look really close to see it. The biggest difference he found was in the color gamut, which was increasing detail in certain objects (like pine trees).  Clearly, the B9180 has a far wider gamut.

Still, if the print life isn't too horrible, then I guess the 1280 isn't ready to be thrown out just yet.  
« Last Edit: November 11, 2006, 01:41:38 PM by lbergman » Logged
thompsonkirk
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 206


WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 11, 2006, 02:30:51 PM »
ReplyReply

A used 2200/2400 probably would have been a better deal.  While the 1280 can make beautiful color prints, they really don't last.  

I'd advise you to use it only to print for yourself & friends who understand this.  I wouldn't attempt to sell any of them.
Logged
dbell
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2006, 05:34:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Thanks, guys!

I should mention I plan on doing a fair amount of B&W printing, maybe to the tune of around a third of all my printing.  So if the 1280 holds it's own on those, that's definitely a plus!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84661\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Unless the money is the issue, I'd pass on the 1280 and get a 2400 instead, if you intend to do B&W work. It's somewhere between difficult and impossible to produce neutral B&W prints on a 1280 without spending a lot on third-party RIPs or dealing with dedicated B&W inksets. These work well, but given the added cost and/or aggravation, I'd just get a new 2400 instead. Just my $.02.


--
Daniel Bell
Logged
nigeldh
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2006, 06:22:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Or you could use MediaStreet G Chrome archival pigment ink cartridges or their Niagara bulk/continuous ink system with G Chrome archival pigment ink.

Nigel
Logged
lbergman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #8 on: November 11, 2006, 10:59:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
A used 2200/2400 probably would have been a better deal.  While the 1280 can make beautiful color prints, they really don't last. 

I'd advise you to use it only to print for yourself & friends who understand this.  I wouldn't attempt to sell any of them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84665\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I got a pretty good deal on 1280, though.  Since print life is an issue, if I end up selling prints I'll probably limit them to 8.5x11 and use the 7150, which seems to have good archival qualities.  That is, until I can get a B9180.  Or find some of that Epson ColorLife paper.

I would have thought Epson would've reformulated the inks over the last 5 years to get better life...
Logged
v70rnj
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #9 on: November 13, 2006, 02:18:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I got a pretty good deal on 1280, though.  Since print life is an issue, if I end up selling prints I'll probably limit them to 8.5x11 and use the 7150, which seems to have good archival qualities.  That is, until I can get a B9180.  Or find some of that Epson ColorLife paper.

I would have thought Epson would've reformulated the inks over the last 5 years to get better life...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84743\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Epson seems to have gone away from the dye ink sets, and have dropped the Colorlife paper for sure.  I've used a 1280 for several years with Media Street Plug-n-Play ink (much less expensive, and seems to have a better gamut and at least equal longevity to the Epson dye ink for the 1280.  I have prints framed under "regular" glass on display with daylight exposure for thre years with no noticeable change from a freshly made comparison reprint with the Colorlife paper and either Epson or Mediastreet PnP ink.

My experieince trying to get decent B&W prints from a 1280 is that it's a great waste of time.  Personally I plan to go to a 3800 once they are shipping and keep the 1280 for economical prints.  BTW, I don't care for the Epson glossy paper, and I prefer the Red River choices for matte and gloss.  Their "Green" recycled paper is also remarkably good for a 100% recycled, post-consumer product if you care about the environment or have customers who do.
Logged
lbergman
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66


« Reply #10 on: November 14, 2006, 07:21:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Epson seems to have gone away from the dye ink sets, and have dropped the Colorlife paper for sure.  I've used a 1280 for several years with Media Street Plug-n-Play ink (much less expensive, and seems to have a better gamut and at least equal longevity to the Epson dye ink for the 1280.  I have prints framed under "regular" glass on display with daylight exposure for thre years with no noticeable change from a freshly made comparison reprint with the Colorlife paper and either Epson or Mediastreet PnP ink.

My experieince trying to get decent B&W prints from a 1280 is that it's a great waste of time.  Personally I plan to go to a 3800 once they are shipping and keep the 1280 for economical prints.  BTW, I don't care for the Epson glossy paper, and I prefer the Red River choices for matte and gloss.  Their "Green" recycled paper is also remarkably good for a 100% recycled, post-consumer product if you care about the environment or have customers who do.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=84995\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for all the comments so far.

I sent an email to Epson asking what they recommend in their line of papers for maximum print life with a 1280 now that they no longer have the ColorLife.  I'll post their reply once I get one.

Did some B&W prints over the weekend to compare how the 7150 does verses the 1280.  I could see some slight difference, but the "color" seemed virtually the same though the 1280 just barely edged out the 7150 in detail (in an approx 9"x7" print).  But then, I'm not all that well versed in what makes a "good" B&W print; both prints just looked fine to me - and any added color casts just add character.    Incidentally, the papers I used were the HP Premium Gloss and Epson Premium Luster.  I'm beginning to really like the Premium Luster, but I have yet to go through the vast majority of the sample packs I have from Red River.

I'm hesitant going with third party inks because the prevous owner of this 1280 had tried some third party ink in it once and was throughly disappointed; basically it was a nightmare of constant clogs and poor printing.  I'm guessing it wasn't Media Street, though I'm going to have to ask him.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad