If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the _real
quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers? The 2400 advertises much higher 5760x1440 dpi printing, but the 4800 at 2880x1440 is listed as a "Pro" model. What gives? Both use the new K3 inks. TIA for any help... Mark |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Mark Anon writes ...
Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the _real quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers? I have the 2200 and 4000 models (one generation earlier) and there are clear differences ... the Pro models are built to tighter tolerances with less drift over time and less unit variation than the consumer 2200/2400 models, so the ICC profiles tend to be more accurate ... I can see this easily with mine ... the Pro models usually print much faster ... the Pro models have 110 and 220 ml ink tanks for each color so the cost per print for ink is a good deal less ... on the other hand the smaller printers will print papers smaller than letter size and the 4000 won't (dunno about the 2400 vs 4800 on this, assume it's the same), so I can use the 2200 to print custom 7x10" cards or even smaller ... not a problem with the 4000 but with the 4800 it will cost you quite a bit in wasted ink when you switch the photo/matte black inks ... smaller one fits comfortably on a desktop, the big one is huge by comparison. I think you need to print a LOT and have a real need for 16x20" prints to justify the 4800, but if you do that's clearly the one to get. Bill |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Bill Hilton wrote:
Mark Anon writes ... Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the _real quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers? I have the 2200 and 4000 models (one generation earlier) and there are clear differences ... the Pro models are built to tighter tolerances with less drift over time and less unit variation than the consumer 2200/2400 models, so the ICC profiles tend to be more accurate ... I can see this easily with mine ... the Pro models usually print much faster ... the Pro models have 110 and 220 ml ink tanks for each color so the cost per print for ink is a good deal less ... on the other hand the smaller printers will print papers smaller than letter size and the 4000 won't (dunno about the 2400 vs 4800 on this, assume it's the same), so I can use the 2200 to print custom 7x10" cards or even smaller ... not a problem with the 4000 but with the 4800 it will cost you quite a bit in wasted ink when you switch the photo/matte black inks ... smaller one fits comfortably on a desktop, the big one is huge by comparison. I think you need to print a LOT and have a real need for 16x20" prints to justify the 4800, but if you do that's clearly the one to get. Have you heard about "phatte" black ink for the 4800? -It sounds like a real solution to the ink-swap problem. -Makes me wish my 4000 was a 4800, since neutral B&W printing is a real pain... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
I have the R2400 and the 7800 Pro. The print speed of a 13x19 is almost
exactly the same between the two.As far as the "PRO" designation, Epson says the 2400 is designed for the pros. The 1800 is considered the home users version.As for closer tolerences for the 4800 over the 2400, pure bs.Yes the cartridges are larger on the 4800, for good reason.I buy the 220ml cartridges and use them in my cis with my 2400.What it all boils down to is, buy the size of printer you really need. Myself, I don't see any use buying the 4800 to gain a couple of inches. The 7800 made more sense for my use! There is more of a difference between the 2200 and the 4000 than there is between the 2400 and the 4800. I can use the same ICC profiles on my 7800 and 2400.As for the Phatte Black thing goes, it is no big deal to me.I print mostly matte, on larger sizes. "Bill Hilton" wrote in message ups.com... Mark Anon writes ... Aside from the obvious difference in print output size, what are the _real quality_ differences between the new Epson 2400 and 4800 printers? I have the 2200 and 4000 models (one generation earlier) and there are clear differences ... the Pro models are built to tighter tolerances with less drift over time and less unit variation than the consumer 2200/2400 models, so the ICC profiles tend to be more accurate ... I can see this easily with mine ... the Pro models usually print much faster ... the Pro models have 110 and 220 ml ink tanks for each color so the cost per print for ink is a good deal less ... on the other hand the smaller printers will print papers smaller than letter size and the 4000 won't (dunno about the 2400 vs 4800 on this, assume it's the same), so I can use the 2200 to print custom 7x10" cards or even smaller ... not a problem with the 4000 but with the 4800 it will cost you quite a bit in wasted ink when you switch the photo/matte black inks ... smaller one fits comfortably on a desktop, the big one is huge by comparison. I think you need to print a LOT and have a real need for 16x20" prints to justify the 4800, but if you do that's clearly the one to get. Bill |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Benwa writes ...
I have the R2400 and the 7800 Pro. The print speed of a 13x19 is almost exactly the same between the two. Who cares? He's asking about the 4800 and it's about twice as fast as the 7800. As far as the "PRO" designation, Epson says the 2400 is designed for the pros. The 1800 is considered the home users version. No, Epson has a different "Professional Graphics" division ... here's the link to their products ... http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/W...seBVCookie=yes .... 4800 is on it, the 2400 isn't ... Here's the link to the 2400 class products, which includes their consumer-grade inkjets ... http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/P...=yes&oid=-8165 As for closer tolerences for the 4800 over the 2400, pure bs. No, it's well known by Epson users that the Pro models are built better and to tighter tolerances, with much smaller unit-to-unit variance ... as one example, here's a quote from their FAQ on the Pro models from the web site listed above for the Auto Head Alignment feature, which isn't offered on the cheaper consumer models ... "How accurate is the Auto Head Alignment and Cleaning Technology used by the Epson Stylus Pro 4800, 7800, and 9800? Very. In fact, although you can still perform these maintenance procedures manually, you will probably never be able to beat the accuracy of the whitebeam sensor technology inside the printer." Bill |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Benwa writes ...
I have the R2400 and the 7800 Pro. The print speed of a 13x19 is almost exactly the same between the two. Bill Hilton wrote .. He's asking about the 4800 and it's about twice as fast as the 7800. Benwa, when I get the facts wrong I'm willing to eat my words and I got this wrong, so I apologize ... the 4000 was almost twice as fast as the 7600 but Epson speeded up the 7800 considerably ... I found this statement on the Epson release info for the 7800 ... "Utilizing our latest high-performance print head technology, the Epson Stylus Pro 7800 is among the fastest print engines in the industry, while printing twice as fast as our previous models." And here are the actual speeds for the 4800 and 7800, which are pretty similar for the same size prints ... 4800 speeds ... Fine 720 dpi HS produces an 8" x 10" in 1:28, 11" x 14" in 2:27, 16" x 20" in 4:07 SuperFine 1440 dpi HS produces an 8" x 10" in 2:00, 11" x 14" in 3:25, 16" x 20" in 6:07 SuperFine 1440 dpi produces an 8" x 10" in 3:17, 11" x 14" in 5:35, 16" x 20" in 9:46 SuperPhoto 2880 dpi HS produces an 8" x 10" in 3:54, 11" x 14" in 6:35, 16" x 20" in 11:40 SuperPhoto 2880 dpi produces an 8" x 10" in 6:25, 11" x 14" in 10:55, 16" x 20" in 18:57. 7800 speeds ... 720 x 720 dpi - HS* produces a 16" x 20" in 4:20, 24" x 30" in 9:54 1440 x 720 dpi - HS* produces a 16" x 20" in 6:41, 24" x 30" in 14:18 2,880 x 1,440 dpi - HS* produces a 16" x 20" in 12:57, 24" x 30" in 26:54 *HS = High Speed Print Mode (Bi-directional Print Mode) So for a HS 16x20 the 4800 takes 11:40 and the 7800 12:57, a lot faster than the 7600 IIRC. Bill |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 04:59:01 GMT, C Wright
wrote: It is a shock to spend the better part of $500 to replace all eight ink cartridges - more if you buy the 220 ml ones. On the other hand you can do a lot of printing before replacements are needed. I have not actually seen a cost study, but I am sure that in the long run buying the larger cartridges has to be cheaper. Yes, a set of 110 ml carts for my 7000 costs... ka-ching... $225 or so. But the good news is that you can make a lot of really big, beautiful prints with 6 x 110 ml. of ink. I figure -- even using Epson branded ink, the 7000 costs about half as much (in ink) per square foot as a desktop model. The newer Epson pro models all take 220 ml cartridges. I just decided against a 4800. I figure for now I'll just have my big *archival* prints done via LightJet or equivalent. I can get it done locally and at "internet" prices. rafe b www.terrapinphoto.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ??
Hi Rafe,
If you decided against a 4800, what are you using, or what do you plan to purchase in place of a 4800. TIA- Mark "rafe b" rafebATspeakeasy.net wrote in message ... On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 04:59:01 GMT, C Wright wrote: It is a shock to spend the better part of $500 to replace all eight ink cartridges - more if you buy the 220 ml ones. On the other hand you can do a lot of printing before replacements are needed. I have not actually seen a cost study, but I am sure that in the long run buying the larger cartridges has to be cheaper. Yes, a set of 110 ml carts for my 7000 costs... ka-ching... $225 or so. But the good news is that you can make a lot of really big, beautiful prints with 6 x 110 ml. of ink. I figure -- even using Epson branded ink, the 7000 costs about half as much (in ink) per square foot as a desktop model. The newer Epson pro models all take 220 ml cartridges. I just decided against a 4800. I figure for now I'll just have my big *archival* prints done via LightJet or equivalent. I can get it done locally and at "internet" prices. rafe b www.terrapinphoto.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Epson printers - 2400 vs. 4800 ?? | Mark Anon | Digital Photography | 99 | January 12th 06 01:29 PM |
EPSON PRINTERS - COST OF INKS! | chabotphoto | Digital Photography | 7 | February 1st 05 05:24 PM |
The film won't die first | Quest0029 | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 77 | November 3rd 04 09:58 AM |
Do the New Epson Printers Still Clog? | Poindexter | Digital Photography | 74 | August 23rd 04 12:09 AM |
Choosing a printer | Morton Klotz | Digital Photography | 16 | August 7th 04 12:22 AM |