Posted by Reno DiTullio on December 18, 2006 at 5:53 PM
Anyone printing with the 3800 yet? I'm looking to upgrade from an Epson 2400 to the 3800 and wondering if the 3800 is as easy to use and as accurate as the 2400.
I just upgraded to the 3800 from the 2400. The 3800 is a much better machine. Works pretty much like the 2400 but with ink levels info on the from panel of the printer. Don't have to baby sit a big runs of prints to replace cartridges. Software is much better, even shows how much ink is used on each print.
I am very happy with it. It's a lot faster too. You can print on high speed with the pro printers and not lose quality as long as you have done a auto print head alignment.
Posted by Reno DiTullio on December 19, 2006 at 4:10 PM
Brian, Peter, thanks for the comments. Brian, is high speed printing only available on the Pro printer? From the info I've read on the Pro model printer the only difference I see, other than being more expensive, is a RIP is included. Do you have the Pro model and is the RIP worth the extra $$'s?
Hi Reno,
I just upgraded to the 3800 from the Canon i9900 printer. This was a major jump for me not ever owning an Epson printer and paying $1,295.00. The i9900 is an excellent printer, but does not compare to the Epson 3800. I've only printed a few photographs so far, but I am extremely pleased. For me the biggest difference with the 3800 is how much control I have over the final print. This was especially true when I printed a few Black and White prints. The ability to fine tune the print is truly amazing. You won't go wrong with the 3800. By the way, when I went to the Photo Expo show in New York last month, I was very interested in seeing the high end Canon printers. I feel that I definitely made the correct choice going with Epson!
Have a Very Merry Christmas,
Gene
Posted by Reno DiTullio on December 20, 2006 at 9:43 AM
Thanks, Eugene. I'm headed out to buy one tomorrow.
My Epson 2200 and 2400 had high speed printing. But there was a loss in quality if you used it. The Pro printers (3800, 4800, 7800, 9800) have more sensors for head calibration. So there is no loss of quality. At least that's what the Epson pros claim.
You don't need a RIP unless you have logos, type, etc. that you are printing. Some photograpers use a RIP to get good B&W photos. But the Epson Advanced B&W mode has made that unnecessary.
Discussion
5 repliesI just upgraded to the 3800 from the 2400. The 3800 is a much better machine. Works pretty much like the 2400 but with ink levels info on the from panel of the printer. Don't have to baby sit a big runs of prints to replace cartridges. Software is much better, even shows how much ink is used on each print.
I am very happy with it. It's a lot faster too. You can print on high speed with the pro printers and not lose quality as long as you have done a auto print head alignment.
I just upgraded to the 3800 from the Canon i9900 printer. This was a major jump for me not ever owning an Epson printer and paying $1,295.00. The i9900 is an excellent printer, but does not compare to the Epson 3800. I've only printed a few photographs so far, but I am extremely pleased. For me the biggest difference with the 3800 is how much control I have over the final print. This was especially true when I printed a few Black and White prints. The ability to fine tune the print is truly amazing. You won't go wrong with the 3800. By the way, when I went to the Photo Expo show in New York last month, I was very interested in seeing the high end Canon printers. I feel that I definitely made the correct choice going with Epson!
Have a Very Merry Christmas,
Gene
My Epson 2200 and 2400 had high speed printing. But there was a loss in quality if you used it. The Pro printers (3800, 4800, 7800, 9800) have more sensors for head calibration. So there is no loss of quality. At least that's what the Epson pros claim.
You don't need a RIP unless you have logos, type, etc. that you are printing. Some photograpers use a RIP to get good B&W photos. But the Epson Advanced B&W mode has made that unnecessary.