Epson R1800 Continuous Ink System

Replying from a similar thread... see below

Arthur Entlich wrote:
Gordon MacPherson wrote:

Have just acquired a R1800 - great prints with Epson inks. I Had a
bad experience with E-compatible ink for the Photo Stylus 870. Am I
wise to stay away from similar inks for the R1800 - prices are SO
attractive!

You might want to consider the R1800 substitute inks from Media Street
inks and Image Specialists. Reports have been good for color matching
and clog resistance. I can't comment of fade resistance, however, and
your mileage may vary.


I'm interested in this topic because I'd like a continuous ink system, I
DO want the best quality and longevity but it just seems silly changing
carts so often, and many times it will run out of ink in the middle of a
print which may sometimes show a line when it attempts to recover.

Does anyone have experience with this system below?

Media Street Continuous Ink System and Set of 7 4oz Bulk Ink Bottles,
for the Epson R1800 Inkjet Printer.
$239.95 at adorama.com

Paul Furman wrote:
Replying from a similar thread... see below

Arthur Entlich wrote:
Gordon MacPherson wrote:

Have just acquired a R1800 - great prints with Epson inks. I Had a
bad experience with E-compatible ink for the Photo Stylus 870. Am I
wise to stay away from similar inks for the R1800 - prices are SO
attractive!

You might want to consider the R1800 substitute inks from Media Street
inks and Image Specialists. Reports have been good for color matching
and clog resistance. I can't comment of fade resistance, however, and
your mileage may vary.


I'm interested in this topic because I'd like a continuous ink system,
I DO want the best quality and longevity but it just seems silly
changing carts so often, and many times it will run out of ink in the
middle of a print which may sometimes show a line when it attempts to
recover.

Does anyone have experience with this system below?


If that is the case you should buy another epson that has larger
cartridges. I think that the 3800 or 4800 is one of those machines.
But the very best is the Canon 5000 pigmented ink printer. It is
designed for professionals.

Media Street Continuous Ink System and Set of 7 4oz Bulk Ink Bottles,
for the Epson R1800 Inkjet Printer.
$239.95 at adorama.com

measekite wrote:


If that is the case you should buy another epson that has larger
cartridges. I think that the 3800 or 4800 is one of those machines.
But the very best is the Canon 5000 pigmented ink printer. It is
designed for professionals.

As are Epson and HP pigment ink printers.
IMHO the HP Z2100 and 3100 are in a class well above the ipF5000.

Paul Furman wrote:
Replying from a similar thread... see below

Arthur Entlich wrote:
Gordon MacPherson wrote:

Have just acquired a R1800 - great prints with Epson inks. I Had a
bad experience with E-compatible ink for the Photo Stylus 870. Am I
wise to stay away from similar inks for the R1800 - prices are SO
attractive!

You might want to consider the R1800 substitute inks from Media Street
inks and Image Specialists. Reports have been good for color matching
and clog resistance. I can't comment of fade resistance, however, and
your mileage may vary.


I'm interested in this topic because I'd like a continuous ink system, I
DO want the best quality and longevity but it just seems silly changing
carts so often, and many times it will run out of ink in the middle of a
print which may sometimes show a line when it attempts to recover.

Does anyone have experience with this system below?

Media Street Continuous Ink System and Set of 7 4oz Bulk Ink Bottles,
for the Epson R1800 Inkjet Printer.
$239.95 at adorama.com


AFAIK none of the 3rd party _pigment_ inks have gloss levels as good as
OEM. Some third party are dye based - surely negating one of the
reasons for owning the R1800 - print longevity.
Also, unless the 3rd party supplier offers good ICC profiles for the
papers that you want to use, then purchasing custom profiles or
equipment to make your own might be needed to meet your quality
expectations.

IMO, selling the R1800 and buying a 3800 would be a better solution -
saving about 35% on ink cost. Purchase price includes about $500 worth
of ink at R1800 prices.

Epson charge $9.00 for R1800 (identical PX-G cartridges) in Japan. Much
less than US prices, less than half of price in Europe. I bet that they
don't have a "problem" with 3rd party and CIS in Japan. Ask them why
the big difference. They won't answer me - but perhaps if enough people
ask...

Ace wrote:

Paul Furman wrote:

Continuous Ink System and Set of 7 4oz Bulk Ink Bottles,
for the Epson R1800 Inkjet Printer.
$239.95 at adorama.com


Paul et al

You might like "inkjetart.com" better. They have great information
and support.

Thanks! ...but when I dig around the links there for continuous ink
systems, I end up he http://www.inkalike.com/cis/
Which suggests they don't sell the system any more (?) and I don't see
the Epson R1800 listed as a model they support.

Am I just not digging deep enough or missing something?

On Jan 29, 7:42 pm, frederick wrote:
measekite wrote:

If that is the case you should buy another epson that has larger
cartridges. I think that the 3800 or 4800 is one of those machines.
But the very best is the Canon 5000 pigmented ink printer. It is
designed for professionals.As are Epson and HP pigment ink printers.
IMHO the HP Z2100 and 3100 are in a class well above the ipF5000.

Why do you say that have ipf5000, has been a super printer right out
of the box. The HPs I don't believe are available in the US yet. The
HP B9180 has had a lot of teething problems.
Just think it is fantasic to have a choice of printers from Canon,
Epson and HP that are as good, if not better than chemical prints (way
past the life of chemical prints). Have an old Epson 9000 that using
was a chore, the Canon works very well.

Tom

This is an excerpt from the Luminous Landscape on the Z3100. It does not
directly compare to the Canon IPF5000. I do not know about the Z2100 as
I have not read any reviews but the results of Luminous tests of the
IPF5000 for 6 months say they are very close.


Competition

An obvious question to ask is – what's the direct competition to the
Z3100 / 24"? At the moment, only the Epson 7800, though there are
rumours of a 24" 12 ink Canon iPF6000 some time in the first half of the
year. The Epson has been a benchmark for some time, but in terms of
features it now comes second to the HP due to the latter's self
profiling capability, Gloss Enhancer, and particularly not having to
swap black inks on the HP when changing media types.

Since I've been printing heavily with the 17" Canon iPF5000 for the past
six months, a question that's bound to be asked is – how do they
compare, and given than the Canon is 2.5X less expensive, is it a better
deal?

As far as print quality goes, the Canon and the HP are very close. I
wouldn't choose one over the other on this basis alone. Of course the
iPF5000 is a 17" printer, while the Z3100 is a 24". This makes a huge
difference in the size of print that one can make, though it doesn't
sound like that much when comparing numbers alone. The fact that the HP
has the built-in profiling spectrophotometer means that one would have
to spend another $1,250 or more to equal it in capability, though even
then not in convenience.

Yes, the Canon has a paper cassette, but its use is limited in terms of
the types of papers that can be sheet fed from it, so that's not as big
a differentiator as one might at first imagine. Size is a factor, with
the iPF5000 being quite large and heavy, but still able to be table
mounted. The Z3100 is definitely designed to be floor standing on its
provided pedestal.

Finally, for those printing on glossy and semi-gloss papers the Gloss
Enhancer in the HP printer is a big plus when compared against the Canon
offering. And, let's not even talk about documentation and ease of use.
The HP is streets ahead of the Canon in this regard.

__________________________________________________ ______


The Bottom Line

If you've gotten this far in the review you'll have gathered that I'm
mightily impressed with the HP Z3100. The company appears to have really
sweated the details and produced what can only be called an absolutely
brilliant printer. Truly state of the art.

And while the price may appear to be higher than the competition, when
you factor in the built-in profiling spectrophotometer, 40GB hard drive
and web server, along with 12 inks, 4 simultaneous blacks, and a Gloss
Enhancer, the value for the money is clearly there. And in any event, as
anyone doing production or large format printing well knows, the cost of
the printer itself is ultimately found to be small compared to the
eventual cost of the paper and ink which it uses over time.

__________________________________________________ ______


Pricing

The Z3100 has a U.S. MSLP of $4,095 for the 24" model (the one I tested)
and $6,295 for the 44" model. The less expensive 8 ink Z2100 has a U.S.
MSLP of $3,395 for the 24" model, and $5,595 for the 44" model.

As for my opinion regarding purchasing an 8 ink Z2100 over the 12 ink
Z3100 – well, I can't see the point of the Z2100. The wider gamut,
enhanced monochrome, and gloss differential cartridge, all seem to me to
be well worth the modest incremental cost of the 3100 series.


Here is the link to the full test from the Luminous Landscape on the
Canon IPF 5000

http://luminous-landscape.com/review...00-terms.shtml

frederick wrote:
measekite wrote:


If that is the case you should buy another epson that has larger
cartridges. I think that the 3800 or 4800 is one of those machines.
But the very best is the Canon 5000 pigmented ink printer. It is
designed for professionals.

As are Epson and HP pigment ink printers.
IMHO the HP Z2100 and 3100 are in a class well above the ipF5000.

On Jan 30, 11:11 am, measekite wrote:
This is an excerpt from the Luminous Landscape on the Z3100. It does not
directly compare to the Canon IPF5000. I do not know about the Z2100 as
I have not read any reviews but the results of Luminous tests of the
IPF5000 for 6 months say they are very close.

Competition

An obvious question to ask is - what's the direct competition to the
Z3100 / 24"? At the moment, only the Epson 7800, though there are
rumours of a 24" 12 ink Canon iPF6000 some time in the first half of the
year. The Epson has been a benchmark for some time, but in terms of
features it now comes second to the HP due to the latter's self
profiling capability, Gloss Enhancer, and particularly not having to
swap black inks on the HP when changing media types.

Since I've been printing heavily with the 17" Canon iPF5000 for the past
six months, a question that's bound to be asked is - how do they
compare, and given than the Canon is 2.5X less expensive, is it a better
deal?

As far as print quality goes, the Canon and the HP are very close. I
wouldn't choose one over the other on this basis alone. Of course the
iPF5000 is a 17" printer, while the Z3100 is a 24". This makes a huge
difference in the size of print that one can make, though it doesn't
sound like that much when comparing numbers alone. The fact that the HP
has the built-in profiling spectrophotometer means that one would have
to spend another $1,250 or more to equal it in capability, though even
then not in convenience.

Yes, the Canon has a paper cassette, but its use is limited in terms of
the types of papers that can be sheet fed from it, so that's not as big
a differentiator as one might at first imagine. Size is a factor, with
the iPF5000 being quite large and heavy, but still able to be table
mounted. The Z3100 is definitely designed to be floor standing on its
provided pedestal.

Finally, for those printing on glossy and semi-gloss papers the Gloss
Enhancer in the HP printer is a big plus when compared against the Canon
offering. And, let's not even talk about documentation and ease of use.
The HP is streets ahead of the Canon in this regard.

__________________________________________________ ______

The Bottom Line

If you've gotten this far in the review you'll have gathered that I'm
mightily impressed with the HP Z3100. The company appears to have really
sweated the details and produced what can only be called an absolutely
brilliant printer. Truly state of the art.

And while the price may appear to be higher than the competition, when
you factor in the built-in profiling spectrophotometer, 40GB hard drive
and web server, along with 12 inks, 4 simultaneous blacks, and a Gloss
Enhancer, the value for the money is clearly there. And in any event, as
anyone doing production or large format printing well knows, the cost of
the printer itself is ultimately found to be small compared to the
eventual cost of the paper and ink which it uses over time.

__________________________________________________ ______

Pricing

The Z3100 has a U.S. MSLP of $4,095 for the 24" model (the one I tested)
and $6,295 for the 44" model. The less expensive 8 ink Z2100 has a U.S.
MSLP of $3,395 for the 24" model, and $5,595 for the 44" model.

As for my opinion regarding purchasing an 8 ink Z2100 over the 12 ink
Z3100 - well, I can't see the point of the Z2100. The wider gamut,
enhanced monochrome, and gloss differential cartridge, all seem to me to
be well worth the modest incremental cost of the 3100 series.

Here is the link to the full test from the Luminous Landscape on the
Canon IPF 5000

http://luminous-landscape.com/review...00-terms.shtml

frederick wrote:
measekite wrote:

If that is the case you should buy another epson that has larger
cartridges. I think that the 3800 or 4800 is one of those machines.
But the very best is the Canon 5000 pigmented ink printer. It is
designed for professionals.

As are Epson and HP pigment ink printers.
IMHO the HP Z2100 and 3100 are in a class well above the ipF5000.

I agree the Z3100 doesn't really compare to the ipf5000. The 5000 is
now $1495 (have seen it as low as $1295) in the US, big difference
between that price and $4K. The self profiling of the Z3100 certainly
ups the bar for this type of printer. My other experience with large
format printing was the Epson 9000, even with Epson inks it took a
couple of days to get a good print starting off. The Canon did gave me
a decent Photo Disc image on the first print, I was even using Ilford
paper. The gloss on Ilford Smooth Gloss is not dramatic but not bad,
with no bronzing (without an Ilford profile). This is very
encouraging, as a lot of the problem with the 9000 was the lack of
longevity of the inks, to print photos you needed an alternate ink
set. This of course presents a lot of problems.
The OP's original question about a bulk ink system for the Epson
R1800. Yes Media Street is a reputable firm and will back you with
good tech support. But you have a printer with an excellent set of
inks, changing inks means, not being able to effectively use the Epson
driver, and wasting a lot of paper trying for decent color. If Media
Street sells profiles (www.mediastreet.com) for their inks on their
papers that is your best bet. Otherwise you need to calibrate your
printer and driver to these new inks.

Tom

measekite wrote:
This is an excerpt from the Luminous Landscape on the Z3100. It does not
directly compare to the Canon IPF5000. I do not know about the Z2100 as
I have not read any reviews but the results of Luminous tests of the
IPF5000 for 6 months say they are very close.

LL act like a marketing arm of Canon.
If they are "mightily impressed" with a non Canon product, and merely
impressed with the Canon product, then...

tomm42 wrote:

On Jan 29, 7:42 pm, frederick wrote:
measekite wrote:

If that is the case you should buy another epson that has larger
cartridges. I think that the 3800 or 4800 is one of those machines.
But the very best is the Canon 5000 pigmented ink printer. It is
designed for professionals.As are Epson and HP pigment ink printers.
IMHO the HP Z2100 and 3100 are in a class well above the ipF5000.

Why do you say that have ipf5000, has been a super printer right out
of the box. The HPs I don't believe are available in the US yet. The
HP B9180 has had a lot of teething problems.
Just think it is fantasic to have a choice of printers from Canon,
Epson and HP that are as good, if not better than chemical prints (way
past the life of chemical prints). Have an old Epson 9000 that using
was a chore, the Canon works very well.

Tom

Because the gloss enhancer (3100) and closed loop calibration, self
monitoring nozzles and standard scalable print-head technology. Part of
the price difference is size. The other part is the built in
spectrophotometer for making profiles(sure - you can buy one separately
at a price, but having it integrated from a hardware and software POV
would be kind of nice).
Yes, the B9180 delayed launch and subsequent teething problems and
sometimes poor support have been a nightmare. That's where Canon and
Epson can leave HP behind - a $100 billion t/o company stuffing that up
so thoroughly smacks of arrogance, complacency, and all round poor
management.
It will be interesting to see what Epson do. Unsubstantiated rumour is
that they will stick with 8 colour K3 - not add colours. The plumbing
changes implemented in the R3800 seem to be effective - but a stopgap
measure. If they "fix" that properly, then I assume they have a 10
channel piezo head - one more channel than inks in existing K3 inkset.
That leaves room for glop.