Best Printer - replacing HP7660

[chrism]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have been using two inkjet printers these last few years - an HP 7660 and an Epson 2400. I rarely need to print at A3, and have found the HP gives me better results at 10x8 or 11x8.5 anyway. Part of that is the difficulty around drivers when these printers are networked, but that is a different question. Lately I have been finding the ink cartridges for the HP 7660 harder to find, and in computer terms the printer is ancient anyway. I have bought in a good stock, but when they are gone it will be time to change the printer. Were it the SPR2400 I was replacing the decision would be easy: get either an HP B9180 or an Epson 3880, but what would be the best replacement for the smaller printer? I have looked at the Epson and HP websites, and can't seem to identify which printer is the bees knees when it comes to photographic printing at less than A3 size.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Chris

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[sanyasi]

I am thrilled with my Epson 4880, but it is much too big for your needs--I print at 17" by 22" regularly. I particularly like the paper handling. Occasionally, a piece of paper gets stuck, but the for most part, the prints come out perfectly centered. I had trouble with a smaller Epson when it comes to paper handling. I will say, I find myself needing to clean the heads more often that I would like, but now that I have figured the problem out, at least I know what to do the first time a bad photo comes out. I've been printing on average once a week since I got the device six months ago.

 

My impression is that Epson is the printer of choice for photographers--although there will be those who disagree. If I were looking to buy a smaller Epson, I'd look for one that uses the K3 Ultra Chrome inks.

 

I know nothing about HP. I had a Canon, but was concerned about the prints fading--I didn't want to start spraying the prints. The color was great.

 

Jack Siegel

[udaniel]

For A4 I use a pretty old HP935c which prints very good color prints, even if the color range is somewhat limited in very dark areas.

Because I now prefer A3 and sometimes even A2 prints I purchased an Epson Pro 3880 and completely agree with James: Perfect prints - and if you print a lot, the cost for the ink is much lower than with most A4 printers. So it's worthwile to do a quick calculation depending on the volume you print (fine art printer, a German magazine, calculated the cost per litre around 1100 Euro for printers with small cartridges around 10ml and about half the price for those with big cartridges around 100ml).

 

The most important bit is indeed the ink: the HP ink of the non-pro printers is good, but bleaches out in daylight over 1-2 years unless the print is no longer usable. The pigment ink Epson (and Canon and HP) uses is long term stable for 50 years or longer, so if you stick your pics on the wall or frame them, switch to a printer with pigmented ink. After reading many test reports, there seems to be a small majority of "fine art" photographers who prefer Epson, then Canon then HP - but it all depends on the volume, size and personal preferences.

 

Hope that helps a little, cheers, Uwe

[chris_tribble]

For small print runs I can't recommend the Epson 2880 too highly. I just got one to replace my Epson 2100 (the cost / availability of ink had become a major issue) and I'm blown away by the B&W and colour IQ. I print most of the time on Harmon FBi gloss (a baryta coated paper) - a lot of the time at A4 but also, when needed at A3 or via the roll feed (brilliant for panoramas)...

 

I agree that it's not the cheapest to run from the perspective of ink costs (silly small cartridges) but from all other points of view it's the best mid-format photo printer I've ever worked with...