If the ink is original and he's hardly used it, there's a good chance the heads are severly clogged. Make sure to run a nozzle check before deciding to buy it.
$300 is a good price if it's in like-new condition but my guess is you can find used 2200s in good shape for less than that (if you can't, I still have my old one ).
The 2400 is better in some respects and worse in others. The K3 inks are more vibrant to my eye, and the paper feeding system on the 2400 is more robust, allowing thick papers to be loaded through the top loader. On the other hand it doesn't have the nice paper cutter the 2200 does that makes using roll paper a lot easier.
If am not wrong 2400 does better job with glossy papers.
Posted by Randy Beacham on November 3, 2006 at 12:48 PM
I bought my 200 through B & H about a year ago refurbished for $500. Never used the 2400 but I love the 2200 and can't think of anything else I'd need for printing photos up to 13 x 19. Randy
Posted by Les Barstow on November 3, 2006 at 4:40 PM
If it works (i.e. it's not clogged), not a bad price for a 13" printer with a nice cutter. If it doesn't fire up after a reasonable cleaning cycle, it's probably not worth it - printer heads are just to **** hard to replace.
If you're doing mixed B&W and color, the 2400 is really that much better that you should at least look at it. If you're just doing color glossy, also take a peek at the R1800, which is cheaper than the 2400 and better print quality than either in its limited domain.
Posted by Frank Winters on November 3, 2006 at 7:09 PM
I bought a 2200 used for $400 about 18 months ago. It had 5 extra inks and has worked perfectly so far. It wasn't used very much before I bought it but it had been used and wasn't on the shelf.
I use it to print matte only and am very satisfied. I use a Canon 9600 for glossy.
I think $300 is a good price -- $250 being the lowest I've heard about recently. But I agree with others -- check it out first.
Frank
Posted by Lisa Cuchara on November 4, 2006 at 1:22 AM
I have the 2200 and love it. You can replace the inks and run the clean heads a few times to get it working properly. $300 is a lot cheaper than the 2400 for sure (& inks are cheaper too)
but I've heard that the 2400 does much better with B&W. I love our 2200 for color glossy and matte B&W, but the B&W glossy does not bode well in our hands. We've been thinking of adding a 2400 because we've been doing more B&W. I'd like to hear people's opinions of their 2400's. I've been trying to find someone to print me a B&W on premium glossy Epson paper with a 2400 -- so that I can compare it to the same photo printed on our 2200. I was going to bring a CF card to Epson at the Photo Expo today in NYC, but ended up not being able to get down there at the last minute.
Posted by Mel Ladewig on November 6, 2006 at 5:59 PM
I would also check the printheads. If they are clogged (which they probably will be if they've sat for a long time), you'll use alot of ink to clear them, and a full set of inks is about $100. You might test it when you go to look at it, and then try to get the cost of the inks knocked off the price. I don't think the heads are user servicable on these epsons. Run the nozzle check. I would rather buy a fairly well used one of these than a lightly used one due to head clogging on the fixed heads. I don't know what the head lifespan is, but I"m sure its a good number of prints.
As an R1800 owner, I would say that the R1800 does a good job on color gloss and semi gloss surfaces, making it a good choice if that is your favorite print medium. The only thing to consider with an R1800 is the yellow ink is just not very well saturated. I don't know the reason, but you'll usually need to push yellow saturation in the driver to get strong vibrant yellow.
My R1800 is in the shop at the moment for an unknown illness (after well over a year of use). Hopefully I'll have an answer tomorrow and a working printer within week or two. It is a communication error, not a printhead clogging issue or anything.
Posted by Rob Coomer on November 7, 2006 at 12:09 PM
I have access to 2 - 2200s. One is mine that gets used a couple of times a month or less now that I have a 7600, and a 2200 where I work that is probably 2 years old and is really close to being on it's first set of cartridges, maybe second. I generally have to run 2-3 cleaning patterns when it gets used every 3 or 4 months, but once it's flushed, it runs beautifully.
It sound like a good deal to me if it works. I run mostly matte, watercolor, and semigloss in mine.
Posted by Jack Graham on November 8, 2006 at 12:16 AM
Discussion
10 repliesHELP NEEDED.
I can buy a 2200 almost new from someone ( he claims the ink is the orig--and hes hardly used it) for 300.00. Here's my questions
1) IS that a good price(seems to be)
2) Is the 2400 really that much better and should I just go for it & bu the 2400?
Thanks
JG
$300 is a good price if it's in like-new condition but my guess is you can find used 2200s in good shape for less than that (if you can't, I still have my old one
The 2400 is better in some respects and worse in others. The K3 inks are more vibrant to my eye, and the paper feeding system on the 2400 is more robust, allowing thick papers to be loaded through the top loader. On the other hand it doesn't have the nice paper cutter the 2200 does that makes using roll paper a lot easier.
Guy
If you're doing mixed B&W and color, the 2400 is really that much better that you should at least look at it. If you're just doing color glossy, also take a peek at the R1800, which is cheaper than the 2400 and better print quality than either in its limited domain.
I use it to print matte only and am very satisfied. I use a Canon 9600 for glossy.
I think $300 is a good price -- $250 being the lowest I've heard about recently. But I agree with others -- check it out first.
Frank
but I've heard that the 2400 does much better with B&W. I love our 2200 for color glossy and matte B&W, but the B&W glossy does not bode well in our hands. We've been thinking of adding a 2400 because we've been doing more B&W. I'd like to hear people's opinions of their 2400's. I've been trying to find someone to print me a B&W on premium glossy Epson paper with a 2400 -- so that I can compare it to the same photo printed on our 2200. I was going to bring a CF card to Epson at the Photo Expo today in NYC, but ended up not being able to get down there at the last minute.
As an R1800 owner, I would say that the R1800 does a good job on color gloss and semi gloss surfaces, making it a good choice if that is your favorite print medium. The only thing to consider with an R1800 is the yellow ink is just not very well saturated. I don't know the reason, but you'll usually need to push yellow saturation in the driver to get strong vibrant yellow.
My R1800 is in the shop at the moment for an unknown illness (after well over a year of use). Hopefully I'll have an answer tomorrow and a working printer within week or two. It is a communication error, not a printhead clogging issue or anything.
It sound like a good deal to me if it works. I run mostly matte, watercolor, and semigloss in mine.
Thanks to all for the input!
Jack
Which one did you end up getting ?
wgw