Epson R2400 or R3000 Printers: Anyone have any experience with these? I'm not used to pigment inks. I'd appreciate any insight any members can provide. Is this the kind of printer a...

Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago

Anyone have any experience with these? I'm not used to pigment inks. I'd appreciate any insight any members can provide. Is this the kind of printer a casual photo maker/ printer like myself needs? I now have a Epson CX9400 and like it's results with dye ink. My maximum size is limited to 8.5 x 11 " Not familiar with pigment ink either. I like the idea of 13 to 17 inch wide images though up to 44" long.

Any insight will be appreciated.

Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago

Anybody?

silver Loc: Santa Monica Ca.

Nikon_DonB wrote:

Anyone have any experience with these? I'm not used to pigment inks. I'd appreciate any insight any members can provide. Is this the kind of printer a casual photo maker/ printer like myself needs? I now have a Epson CX9400 and like it's results with dye ink. My maximum size is limited to 8.5 x 11 " Not familiar with pigment ink either. I like the idea of 13 to 17 inch wide images though up to 44" long.

Any insight will be appreciated.

I teach a class on digital printing and the school acquired an Epson 3000 for the class. This is a really fine printer. When it prints you cant even hear it print, we always have to look inside the printer to see that it is printing which it always is. The printer does fine color as well as really fine B&W prints. The 3000 is a great printer.

Trevor Dennis Loc: New Zealand (South Island)

I have three buddies with the 2400. Personally I will never replace my Canon Pixma 9000 if it ever dies, and I will definitely never buy anything bigger, because they don't make economic sense unless you are producing a LOT of big prints for sale. They also take up a big heap of desk space.

silver Loc: Santa Monica Ca.

silver wrote:

quote=Nikon_DonB Anyone have any experience with ... (show quote)

One other thing, the 3000 uses larger ink cartridges and your ink cost is a little less.

maryhw Loc: Dexter, MI

I have had the Epson 3800 for several years. Because of the large ink tanks the cost per print is less. The pigment inks produce beautiful prints and they are water resistant, so tiny droplets don't ruin a print. The 3800 and 3880 will print up to 17x22 inches.

A.J.R. Loc: Devon, UK

I have the R2400, excellent printer for colour and monochrome, but if I needed to replace it would certainly go for the R3000 because of the larger ink cartridges. Not only slightly cheaper but don't have to fiddle around changing cartriges so often.

moffie100

How often will you be printing? I have heard numerous comments about not using Epsons for a week and the ink drying up on the edge of the cartridge. It has a "clean" but wastes a lot of ink to use it. You might want to check on it.

A.J.R. Loc: Devon, UK

Have had my R2400 for six years now and have very rarely had to clean the heads. It is certainly not used constantly, as I might make several prints in one day and then not use it again for many weeks. I was told when I bought it to leave it swiched on all the time to alleviate the ink drying up problem, but have never read this advice anywhere else. It does however seem to work. Or maybe I've just been lucky.

Nikon_DonB Loc: Chicago

Thanks for the input folks. I ordered a R3000 from B&H. Right now they are $759. with a $150. rebate and free shipping. That's a deal when the shipping weight is 46 pounds with UPS. I also found B&H's price on Epson paper to be "WAY" more reasonable than Epson's. The 13 x 19" Premium Glossy was $20.00 less than Epson's. They have a better deal on the ink too.