Printer Recommendation

[sanyasi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My Epson 4900 died. I am being told that the repair cost is around $3,000 for a printer that sells $1,795. This time it is the print heads. 18 months ago it was the feed mechanism on my Epson 4880 (two times within a year). I love the prints that come out of the printer, but I am not happy with the durability of the parts and the cost of replacement.

 

With that in mind, can anyone give me an indication of their experience with other manufacturers? I am considering the Canon ImagePROGRAF IPF 5100. Given how these are priced, I would consider the bigger 24 inch printers if these are better built printers, although space is an issue. I am not interested in the Epson 3880.

 

Thanks

[Advertisement]

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

[sanyasi]

I might add that I find Epson to be environmentally offensive, and I am not exactly the great environmentalist. I can buy a new Epson 4900 for around $1650 with rebate, but I am suppose to pay $3,000 to repair the printer. What Epson and their replacement parts pricing does is incentivize me to throw out a printer and buy a new one. The case and electronics are all fine, as is the feed mechanism, but as I think about it, that is likely what will happen because I am sitting with 7 unopened replacement cartridges that sell for around 90 bucks each, plus I can use my existing cartridges to prime the printer when i first open it, rather than using the unopened cartridges, so the cost of replacing the 4900 is actually all under $1,000.

[jevidon]

I ran into the same problem with my HP B9180 which produced astounding prints for several years before the print heads needed replacing. I found as did you that replacement of the printer is cheaper. Unfortunately, HP no longer makes that printer or it's equivalent having now concentrated of run of the mill home and professional office printers and big expensive professional photo printers.

I now have an Epson Photo 3000. It is at least as good as was the B9180, but needs more attention. The HP had to be left on all the time so that the printer could do a check and clean once/day. It also featured a built in scanner to check print quality and settings as it printed. That saved a lot of re-printing and paper. With the Epson, you are supposed to turn it off when not using it to prevent clogging, but if you leave it off for weeks at a time, it still clogs when you turn it on. It is recommended running a test page on plain paper an/or cleaning the heads as many times as necessary to get a good test page. Then it is OK to print.

 

Frankly, in that respect, the Epson is a disappointment. Even though you need to keep up the maintenance to keep it up to par, prints are gorgeous. So I'd recommend the R3000.

 

The only other game in town is the Canon, but paper selection seems to be more limited than Epson.

[jevidon]

I might add that I find Epson to be environmentally offensive, and I am not exactly the great environmentalist. I can buy a new Epson 4900 for around $1650 with rebate, but I am suppose to pay $3,000 to repair the printer. What Epson and their replacement parts pricing does is incentivize me to throw out a printer and buy a new one. The case and electronics are all fine, as is the feed mechanism, but as I think about it, that is likely what will happen because I am sitting with 7 unopened replacement cartridges that sell for around 90 bucks each, plus I can use my existing cartridges to prime the printer when i first open it, rather than using the unopened cartridges, so the cost of replacing the 4900 is actually all under $1,000.

 

Go on line and offer the unused ink at an attractive price.

[Jeff S]

The only other game in town is the Canon, but paper selection seems to be more limited than Epson.

 

 

Myriad papers possible with either; just requires an appropriate profile.

 

Jeff

[Jeff S]

Another option is to buy a new Epson, but consider purchasing an additional one to two years extended warranty (beyond the initial one year), and offset that cost with use of equivalent Cone refillable ink sets that are far more cost effective and environmentally friendly.

 

The 4900 has been known to have problems with clogs/heads (a dealer confided that production even halted for some period). This was much less an issue with the former 4800 or 3800/3880 (don't know why you're averse to it).

 

The problem with Epson IMO is that reduced competition (and perhaps less printing in general) has dramatically slowed product improvement and innovation. They've become lazy, apparently content to make profits on inks for existing models. [A reason that repair costs are so expensive compared to outright purchase is that printer prices are intentionally cheap to get you to buy inks, which is where the margins are (like razors and razor blades).] This article suggests some possible upcoming updates, but I won't hold my breath. Fortunately, my 3800 is going strong after almost 6 years of frequent use.

 

Keep in mind that feed issues are common to multiple printer brands; that has always been an Achilles heel. And I had a friend who loved his Canon, but it eventually died and he moved to Epson. The grass is always greener...assuming color correctness.

 

Jeff

[sanyasi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The R3000 does not print large enough size. As for the 3880, when I used the more consumer oriented printers, I had lots of problems with the prints coming out with uneven borders. I have no doubt that people will post saying that they don't have that problem. I did, so I went to a more tank like printer at relatively little additional cost. Maybe things have improved from 8 years ago, but I am sticking with the tank.

 

The solution seems to be wasteful, but simple: Throw out the old 4900, buy a new one with rebate, and buy the 2-year extended warranty for $535. Based on my existing ink stock, the cost of the new printer with warranty is about $1000 to $1100. If I get 3 years out of the printer, that will be sufficient. Hopefully by then the technology will have improved.

 

I might consider the comparable Canon printer, but the reviews seemed to be mixed. Setting aside durability, the preferred printer brand in terms of output seems to be Epson. It would be nice to try a Canon, but at this point, finding a dealer with one in stock for demonstration is not easy.

 

As has been pointed out, we need more manufacturers of high-end inkjet printers so that there is some competition to spur innovation.

 

Thanks to all who replied.

[Jeff S]

As for the 3880, when I used the more consumer oriented printers, I had lots of problems with the prints coming out with uneven borders. I have no doubt that people will post saying that they don't have that problem. I did, so I went to a more tank like printer at relatively little additional cost. Maybe things have improved from 8 years ago, but I am sticking with the tank.

 

Things have improved...except, unfortunately, with the 4900. A friend has both the 4900 and 4880, now that his Canon has died. The 4900 needed head replacement (under warranty). If he had to do it again, he said he'd get the 3880. I'd love to see a 3900 with some even further improvements.

 

Jeff