From: Peter Marshall (petermarshall@cix.co.uk)
Date: 06/06/03-08:11:12 AM Z
Hi,
There is a very good comparison of the 1280 and the 2000P at:
http://www.inkjetart.com/news/13_recommend.html
much of which would apply to the 2200, which is a considerably improved
version of the 2000P.
For a more general discussion of printer choice, you might like to look at
my recent piece at:
http://photography.about.com/cs/digital/a/040703.htm
Personally I'd go for the 2200, or think of spending most of the
difference in price on a continuous inking system and an inkset such as
the G4 inks, but your needs may be very different to mine. At the moment I
would also look very carefully at the Canon i9100.
Regards,
Peter Marshall
Photography Guide at About http://photography.about.com/
email: photography.guide@about.com
_________________________________________________________________
London's Industrial Heritage: http://petermarshallphotos.co.uk/
The Buildings of London etc: http://londonphotographs.co.uk/
My London Diary http://mylondondiary.co.uk/
and elsewhere......
> --Boundary_(ID_Q7Cv335uTrtmwCsQxiheWQ)
> Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>
> I have been comparing the stats for the Epson 2200 Stylus photo printer
> (the max my current budget will allow) vs those for the 1280. I have
> read the detailed literature giving comparisons of archival qualities,
> etc. However, the rebate now being offered for the 1280 makes it very
> attractive....some dollars left to buy consumables! But the larger
> format of the 2200 is a plus. And I scan 35mm slides as opposed to
> using a digital camera.
>
> Having had no practical experience with either of the printer models,
> my questions are:
>
> Is the color that much more fantastic with the 7-color inks? Does
> anyone have experience such that they could give me an idea is the
> 2200, having more print nozzles, gives more problems with nozzle
> clogging than the 1280 does, which, I assume, has fewer nozzles?
>
> Does the archival data of 80 yrs vs 27 yrs hold up when the image is
> printed on fine art papers?
>
> And, lastly, is image sharpness perceptibly better with the 2200,
> particularly on fine art papers?
>
> Thanks in advance for comments about your experiences!
>
>
> J. Rowe Taylor
> Mukilteo, WA
> jrtaylorphoto@aol.com
>
> --Boundary_(ID_Q7Cv335uTrtmwCsQxiheWQ)
> Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>
> <HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>I have been comparing
> the stats for the Epson 2200 Stylus photo printer (the max my current
> budget will allow) vs those for the 1280. I have read the
> detailed literature giving comparisons of archival qualities, etc.
> However, the rebate now being offered for the 1280 makes it very
> attractive....some dollars left to buy consumables! But the
> larger format of the 2200 is a plus. And I scan 35mm slides as
> opposed to using a digital camera. <BR>
> <BR>Having had no practical experience with either of the printer
> models, my questions are:
> <BR>
> <BR>Is the color that much more fantastic with the 7-color inks?
> Does anyone have experience such that they could give me an idea
> is the 2200, having more print nozzles, gives more problems with nozzle
> clogging than the 1280 does, which, I assume, has fewer nozzles?
> <BR>
> <BR>Does the archival data of 80 yrs vs 27 yrs hold up when the image
> is printed on fine art papers?
> <BR>
> <BR>And, lastly, is image sharpness perceptibly better with the 2200,
> particularly on fine art papers?
> <BR>
> <BR>Thanks in advance for comments about your experiences!
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>J. Rowe Taylor
> <BR>Mukilteo, WA
> <BR>jrtaylorphoto@aol.com</FONT></HTML>
>
> --Boundary_(ID_Q7Cv335uTrtmwCsQxiheWQ)--
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 07/09/03-08:31:13 AM Z CST