Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Epson R2200 still a good buy?  (Read 7690 times)
Kumar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659


WWW
« on: December 23, 2006, 07:23:03 PM »
ReplyReply

I've started printing my own images only recently on an A4 Japan-only PM-G800, which is supposed to be the dye equivalent of the R800. I have the opportunity to buy a PM-4000PX - the same as the R2200/2100 for about $200.

I do want to print larger than A4, as well as B&W, which is unsatisfactory on my current printer.

Are there any issues that I need to be aware of? Ink usage is important!

With all the new printers in the market, is this still a good buy?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,
Kumar
Logged

Dale_Cotton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2006, 08:25:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Kumar wrote:
Quote
do want to print larger than A4, as well as B&W, which is unsatisfactory on my current printer.
The 2200 had many sterling qualities but among them was not colour accuracy. Epson made a huge improvement both in linearizing its drivers and in reducing unit-to-unit variance ... with the next generation after the 2200. The upshot is that you're likely to find it impossible to eliminate some colour cast or another to various parts the greyscale even with custom profiles. In fact, the European 2100 came with a special software app - Grey Balancer, or some such - dedicated to just that task. For printing colour images - well, let's just say some folk had better luck with their 2200s than others.

That said, there are alternate ink sets available that many wrote highly of, if you want to go that route.

Quote
Are there any issues that I need to be aware of? Ink usage is important!
I don't remember that the 2200 used an unusual amount of ink per job. The problem is that the cartridges only hold about 15ml of ink, so if you print larger than A4, you tend to find one cartridge or another perpetually needing replacement. Not a show-stopper: just less than ideal.

My own experience is that you'll quickly recoup the higher initial outlay for a more modern A3 printer just from what it will save you in custom profiles, alternate ink sets, endless test prints, and/or a pricey RIP.
Logged
Kumar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2006, 08:31:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, Dale.

I'm new to printing, and am just beginning to learn the ropes. I see many photographers are still using these printers, and wanted some first-hand reports.

Cheers,
Kumar
Logged

K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 662


« Reply #3 on: December 23, 2006, 08:54:54 PM »
ReplyReply

If it's in good working order and reasonable hours on it it's probably a total steal at $200.

Quote
Kumar wrote:
The 2200 had many sterling qualities but among them was not colour accuracy.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hmm, that's a matter of opinion. The big change with the 2400 was the new ink set.

If you run a 2200 with a RIP then you have a printer with exceptional color accuracy.

I run a 2200 with Image Print and it's so close to the current generation of printers that I see no need to upgrade yet. I'll wait until the Canon becomes a 5500 with an intelligent user interface.

In fact even in his review of the 4800 Michael said "Epson 2200 owners though might want to think twice about the necessity of upgrading. Improvements are there, but not really compelling, especially if the Imageprint RIP is considered."


[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/4800-1st.shtml]http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/prin.../4800-1st.shtml[/url]
Logged
Kumar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659


WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 23, 2006, 09:04:32 PM »
ReplyReply

ImagePrint Lite is $495, and the full version is $995! Is it still a good buy??

Cheers,
Kumar
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8219



WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 23, 2006, 09:08:19 PM »
ReplyReply

My experience is similar to K.C.'s. My 2200 is doing just fine, with ImagePrint for color, and QuadTone RIP for B&W (does better than IP in my view.) I won't upgrade my 2200 until it dies. At that point, probably something like the 3800 will do me for the next few years.

I tried the "Gray Balancer" before I heard of QuadTone, but it never worked for me.

If you need accurate color with the 2200, ImagePrint (Lite) is just about a necessity, as well as Monitor calibration hardware and software. If you aren't fussy about color, you can get away without IP.

That's my 2 c.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2006, 09:11:21 PM by EricM » Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

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

Posts: 659


WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2006, 11:21:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Okay. Here's a twist. I just came back from the store, and now they have a PX-G5000 aka the R1800 as well, for about $300. I've been reading up a bit, and it seems the R1800 does better glossy prints. I love the punch of Crispia paper, and don't want to miss out on the gloss if I buy the R2200.

So what do I buy now?

Cheers,
Kumar
« Last Edit: December 23, 2006, 11:22:29 PM by Kumar » Logged

K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 662


« Reply #7 on: December 24, 2006, 01:30:47 AM »
ReplyReply

If you want to print B&W then the 2200 is far superior. It uses a light black in addition to the matte or photo black. This gives you much greater scale and detail. Eric is correct, the Quadtone RIP is superior for B&W. There are no color RIPs available for the R1800, that I know of.

From an archival standpoint the R1800 and 2200 are equal, as far as anyone knows.

Yes IP lite is $495 and it's all you need. The profiles that come with it are very, very good.

Both of these RIPS are a tremendous value, producing top quality prints consistently. IP lite is also upgradeable, your license/dongle travels with you when you move to a new printer and wish to change to the appropriate version of IP. I recently inquired about moving to the 4800 (before the Canon iPF5000 existed) and the cost for me to upgrade to the full version of IP was $500. The standard price is $895.

When I bought IP lite for the my 2200 it was a huge expense for me. In retrospect it's the best money I've ever spent. Image quality is outstanding. It also uses a lot less ink and I've seen my investment returned by this alone.
Logged
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 662


« Reply #8 on: December 24, 2006, 01:35:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Just found this R1800  / 2200 comparison:

http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsigh...1800_alain.html
Logged
jjlphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 467


« Reply #9 on: December 24, 2006, 10:32:53 AM »
ReplyReply

If you are looking for an older printer to buy on the cheap just to get started, I recommend the Epson 1280. It has a dye inkset, but if you are a beginner, hundred year permanance is not your top priority. The dye inkset does not suffer from metermarism, bronzing or gloss differential. The 2200 inkset suffered from lots of metamerism, and is a bit#h to get a neutral BW print out of. If you have your heart set on pigment inks, then the 2400 with the K3 inkset is really the only way to go.
Logged

Thanks, John Luke

Member-ASMP
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 662


« Reply #10 on: December 24, 2006, 12:24:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you are looking for an older printer to buy on the cheap just to get started, I recommend the Epson 1280. It has a dye inkset, but if you are a beginner, hundred year permanance is not your top priority. The dye inkset does not suffer from metermarism, bronzing or gloss differential. The 2200 inkset suffered from lots of metamerism, and is a bit#h to get a neutral BW print out of. If you have your heart set on pigment inks, then the 2400 with the K3 inkset is really the only way to go.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

With all due respect, you've got to be kidding.

The 1280 with Epson inks doesn't come even close to current printer capability and the 2200 with a RIP suffers no metermerism to speak of.

Read Michaels reviews here.

1270/1280/: [a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/epson_1270.shtml]http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/prin...pson_1270.shtml[/url]

http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/prin...Epson2200.shtml
Logged
jeffok
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 108


WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 24, 2006, 12:41:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've started printing my own images only recently on an A4 Japan-only PM-G800, which is supposed to be the dye equivalent of the R800. I have the opportunity to buy a PM-4000PX - the same as the R2200/2100 for about $200.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92110\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Kumar
Another thing to remember is that if you buy a 4000PX and then bring it back to, say, North America as I did, you will NOT be able to use the Epson replacement inks for the 2200 in the 4000PX. The chips on the ink carts are different and they won't work- even if you change the chips, as I tried to do but failed. I bought a 3800 and really like that I can print up to 17 in and also that the 3800 producers very neutral and beautiful B&W prints. The 2200/4000PX does have metamerism problems and while it produces very nice color prints on matte or semi-gloss papers, you would not be happy with the results on glossy papers as there is no gloss optimizer. All that said and FWIW, for $200 I would jump on the 4000PX as it is an excellent printer for that price.
Logged
Kumar
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659


WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 24, 2006, 04:50:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you everybody. Glossy prints are important to me, so I'll go with the R1800. I'm aware of Epson's dirty tricks department . They don't name the printers the same worldwide, and make the carts differently here. I'd have liked to get both of them - but there's no place to keep them. So it's one or the other.

Happy Holidays.
Kumar
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4218



« Reply #13 on: December 25, 2006, 08:39:11 PM »
ReplyReply

The R1800 does wonderful glossy. Best gamut in town.

Edmund

Quote
Thank you everybody. Glossy prints are important to me, so I'll go with the R1800. I'm aware of Epson's dirty tricks department . They don't name the printers the same worldwide, and make the carts differently here. I'd have liked to get both of them - but there's no place to keep them. So it's one or the other.

Happy Holidays.
Kumar
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92209\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad