Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Epson R1800 or R2400?  (Read 4836 times)
Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« on: November 19, 2006, 07:16:58 PM »
ReplyReply

OK, I think it's time to replace my long-in-the-tooth 2200.  The new Epson equivalents would be the R1800 or the R2400, which use different inksets.  I'm looking for people here who are familiar with both who can suggest which one is more appropriate for me.  I print mostly on non-Epson glossy papers (mostly; occasionally on matte).  The 2200's gloss differential is a non-issue for me; I can't see any functional difference after it's behind glass.  The outgassing is a much for serious problem for me (fogging the glass).  I print primarily landscapes with realistic (not Velvia-esque) colors, and shadow detail is important to me.  About 10% of my prints are B&W, so lack of metamerism-produced color casts would be good too.

Given all that, could someone explain the effective difference between the R1800's and R2400's inksets and suggest which would be more appropriate for me?  The cost difference between the printers is not very significant to me.

Oh yeah - my only significant complaint about my 2200 is the tiny ink cartridges - I'm replacing one or another of them practically every couple of 12"x18" prints, which is annoying.  Is there any difference in ink usage or ink cartridge size between the two newer printers?

Thanks,
Lisa
« Last Edit: November 19, 2006, 10:55:51 PM by nniko » Logged

DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2006, 08:53:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I would try www.photo-i.co.uk .  Vincent has reviewed both printers.
Logged
jbryer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2006, 08:37:19 AM »
ReplyReply

I think the 2400 is the clear winner, especially for matte and B&W. However, I would seriously consider the 3800 if you are going to stay with Epson. Accounting for the extra ink that comes with printer makes it practically a free upgrade, plus it will be cheaper to operate in the long run.

That said, I just got a Canon iPF5000 for $1350. There are some dealers providing some incredible deals. Well worth the extra cost from my point of view.

-Jason


Quote
OK, I think it's time to replace my long-in-the-tooth 2200.  The new Epson equivalents would be the R1800 or the R2400, which use different inksets.  I'm looking for people here who are familiar with both who can suggest which one is more appropriate for me.  I print mostly on non-Epson glossy papers (mostly; occasionally on matte).  The 2200's gloss differential is a non-issue for me; I can't see any functional difference after it's behind glass.  The outgassing is a much for serious problem for me (fogging the glass).  I print primarily landscapes with realistic (not Velvia-esque) colors, and shadow detail is important to me.  About 10% of my prints are B&W, so lack of metamerism-produced color casts would be good too.

Given all that, could someone explain the effective difference between the R1800's and R2400's inksets and suggest which would be more appropriate for me?  The cost difference between the printers is not very significant to me.

Oh yeah - my only significant complaint about my 2200 is the tiny ink cartridges - I'm replacing one or another of them practically every couple of 12"x18" prints, which is annoying.  Is there any difference in ink usage or ink cartridge size between the two newer printers?

Thanks,
Lisa
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86102\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2006, 09:01:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Lisa, I think Jason makes a good point. Even though the printer costs a lot up front, in the long term it is the inks and papers that add up. Therefore if you want to stay with Epson, I'd consider moving up to the 3800 simply because of the extra inks you get with the initial purchase, as well as the cheaper $/mL ink for the 80 mL cartridges, as well as not having to change them as often. As added bonuses, you can keep both matte and photo black cartridges in at the same time, even if you need photo black for your glossy prints most of the time, and you have the option of printing up to 17" wide for the occasional big print.

To answer your specific question, though, both inksets for the 1800 and 2400 are supposed to pretty archival, so longevity should not weigh into the decision here. The main difference I would say is matte. I know you don't print on matte often, but the 1800's inks don't work nearly as well with matte papers as the 2400/3800's K3 inks. For neutral B&W prints I would also stay with the 2400/3800 K3 inks and the Advanced B&W driver.

Eric
Logged

Paul Sumi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1217


« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2006, 02:00:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Even though the printer costs a lot up front, in the long term it is the inks and papers that add up. Therefore if you want to stay with Epson, I'd consider moving up to the 3800 simply because of the extra inks you get with the initial purchase, as well as the cheaper $/mL ink for the 80 mL cartridges, as well as not having to change them as often. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86160\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Lisa,

I have had a 2400 for the past year.  With a calibrated workflow I get terrific results (printing primarily color on matte papers).  BTW, the glossy prints I have made, both B&W and color, have been very good as well.

However, I have to agree with manmanchan's suggestion.  The 2400 swills ink like a drunken pirate.  Not a big deal if you're printing in small quantities, but if you're printing on a regular basis it really adds up.

Paul
« Last Edit: November 20, 2006, 02:02:18 PM by PaulS » Logged

dbell
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2006, 03:09:31 PM »
ReplyReply

IMO, the 1800 is not in the same category as the 2400/3800 when it comes to B&W. If that's an important part of what you do, I would not consider the 1800. I have not personally used a 3800,  but on paper, it seems to be worth the added cost.


--
Daniel Bell
Logged
Lisa Nikodym
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1702



WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2006, 11:11:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey, thanks for the suggestions.  The 3800 is looking pretty attractive, especially because of the larger ink cartridge size.  But do any of you have any data for how much cheaper the ink should be in the long run than for the 2200 or R2400?  The one review web site with a price (they aren't actually available yet) suggested that each 80 ml cartridge would sell for about $60.  Each 18 ml ink cartridge for my 2200 is about $12 regular retail (though I get them for about $9 each) .  Do the arithmetic - the 3800's ink sounds *more* expensive, not less.  What's up with that???

Quote
The 2400 swills ink like a drunken pirate.

   I understand.  The 2200 is the same way...

Lisa
Logged

dbell
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2006, 05:04:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hey, thanks for the suggestions.  The 3800 is looking pretty attractive, especially because of the larger ink cartridge size.  But do any of you have any data for how much cheaper the ink should be in the long run than for the 2200 or R2400?  The one review web site with a price (they aren't actually available yet) suggested that each 80 ml cartridge would sell for about $60.  Each 18 ml ink cartridge for my 2200 is about $12 regular retail (though I get them for about $9 each) .  Do the arithmetic - the 3800's ink sounds *more* expensive, not less.  What's up with that???
   I understand.  The 2200 is the same way...

Lisa
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Two other things to consider: I believe the 3800 lets you load both the matte and photo black inks at the same time. The 2400 doesn't. The 3800 is also a 17" printer, while the 2400 is only 13" wide.

I'd love to be able to make bigger prints, but doing so would force me to upgrade everything else .


db
Logged
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2006, 06:09:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Lisa, I think the initial price of the 80 mL carts will be higher just because it's a new item. We can't know for sure, of course, but I suspect in the long term that the 80 mL carts will come down in price and then settle at a fixed price. For example, the 220 mL carts for the 4800 used to cost a lot more than they do now (which is around $84).

Eric
Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad