Do yourself a favor and look into the EPSON Photo Printers. Totally affordable, totally superior.. imo
As a pro photographer I need the best inkjet I can afford. At the moment I use an Epson 2100 (2200 in the USA). Well under 1000 euro, so I suppose it will be under $1000 in the USA.
This printer has really convinced me about the quality of inkjet printers; within a few days I’ll order its "Big Brother", the 7600. And believe me, I’m rather critical.
Leen
If you shop around, Cory, you should be able to find the 2200 for $499 or less, if that one interests you.
Barbara, I’m really surprised at that price – has Epson started to discount it? They’re generally very insistent with their retailers regarding minimum pricing…
Chuck
Barbara: I double-checked with price.com, which lists over 20 sellers of the 2200: lowest price is $569 and that’s at one of the more poorly rated e-tailers… Generally, a price floor of around $625 seems to prevail. Am I missing a real bargain somewhere??
Chuck
ya know the epson 1280 seems like a swift little buy right now with $100 mir which brings it down to $399 and that’s on the epson site. Probably cheaper elsewhere. Looks like a nifty photo friendly gadget 😉
Well, I’d speculate that maybe it’s more likely that they have been loosening up on letting resellers use them as loss leaders in this economy. It wouldn’t surprise me if something new was in the wings, though. It’s about time.
And those new canons are their most serious competition in quite a while.
Chuck…I found it new for $575 (pcvideoonline), $579 at Broadway Photo, $599 at Atlex…hope this helps!
Cory
Cory, thanks. I’m not really in the market yet – will see if the prices ease off a little more. Plus I’m a Canon person, so I have to check them out also… Appreciate your research’ though!
Cory,
I have an epson 1280 which I love. I wonder how much individual ink cartridges really save you economically. A full-color cartridge for the 1280 costs just over $20, and the individual 2200 cartridges cost about $10. So by the time you replace each individual cartridge on the 2200, you could have bought 3 full color cartridges for the 1280.
There is no question the individual cartridges waste less ink, so you could argue they are more resourceful, better for the environment. Then again, they probably use more plastic! Then we could talk recycling.
Performance-wise, though, the big advantage of the 2200 seems to be the pigment inks and their longevity.
Enough of all that. Did you pick a printer?
Eric
Eric, the costs of the ink cartridges for the 2100 (USA 2200) are considerable indeed. Here in Europe these cartridges even cost twice as much!
That’s the reason today I finally decided to buy the 7600 large format printer. It’s much more economical in the end, although just only the initial two sets (one in the printer and a spare set) of 8 ink cartridges will cost me well over $ 1200!
Leen
Eric..not yet. I have been doing a lot of research on the Kodak 8500. It’s quite a bit more than the P-400, but an awesome looking machine that prints the full 8 x 10…I just don’t know whether to take the leap from inkjets to dye! I’ve read so much good and bad about BOTH!
Cory
Cory, you could do what lots of folks do…buy both and try ’em both and return the one that’s less pleasing. I know my epson printer was packaged with full ink when i bought it…not sure about the others though…could be costly to buy ink for testing for both. Either way, you’ll know. I love my ePSON :Þ
Cory, I’m confused by your comments about inkjet and dye. Many inkjets use dye-based ink. Are you referring to dye-sub printers? I’m not very familiar with that yet. You are looking at some pretty high-end printers considering that you are only intending to do 8×10’s! Are you really intending to go larger? If not, you could get something in the 800 or 900 series of epsons for under $200 I believe. I have the impression that the quality between the different models is pretty consistent, until you make the jump between different ink technologies. The biggest difference between printers by the same manufacturer that use a particular kind of ink seems to be the output size.
I wonder how many people are just pushing you to buy the biggest, baddest printer you can afford. Eric
Hi Jodi…Eric…Yes, I am talking about Dye-sub printers. 8 x 10 is the largest I am really interested in printing. I do intend on selling prints. I have ALWAYS loved photography and finally got a Canon D10 in June, PS7 should be here any day…PE2 came with my camera and I just loved it…and that’s what brought me to this forum, which I love and will never leave. You, Jodi, Ray, Barb, and others are just great. Now I want to get a dedicated photo printer, the last piece in the puzzle!
I know the inkjets do a nice job…but someone sent me a couple photos from the Olympus P-400 and they really do look like they came from a lab. The stuff used in the Kodak printer are the same ribbon and paper used in their labs that Wal-Mart, Ritz, etc., use. The finish is really nice too…even water splashes can be wiped right off!
I have had (still do) HP printers and only one I had trouble with was my HP2000C, which used the 4 separate inks…and I have thought of the 2200 or the Canon S9100 (I think) with the newest inks, but I have read that some people are having clogging problems with the 2200.
Decisions, decisions…I do appreciate everyone’s input.
Cory
