whick inkjet is economical?

[Talal Itani]

Hi,

I have a Canon inkjet printer with series 8 cartridges. I do a lot of
printing, so I need a more economical solution. Are Professional Epson more
economical on the ink? Do you have any suggestions? Thanks.

Talal Itani

 

[Jan Alter]

--

Hi,

I have a Canon inkjet printer with series 8 cartridges. I do a lot of
printing, so I need a more economical solution. Are Professional Epson
more economical on the ink? Do you have any suggestions? Thanks.

Talal Itani

With that caveat you may want to consider a CIS unit for your printer if it
is available.

Jan Alter
(e-mail address removed)

 

[measekite]

Hi,

I have a Canon inkjet printer with series 8 cartridges. I do a lot of
printing, so I need a more economical solution. Are Professional Epson more
economical on the ink? Do you have any suggestions? Thanks.

Talal Itani

If you want a wide format printer that uses pigment ink and is able to
get better ink mileage then look at the Epson 3800. The printer will
print a 16x20 and has super sized ink tanks. Each tank costs over $50
but is meant for heavy semi pro use.

 

[measekite]

You never want to use aftermarket ink when you print photos. You do not
want fading and you do want great color and quality.

Jan Alter wrote:

 

[Talal Itani]

Epsons consume a good deal more ink than Canons do. Your best solution
will
be compatible tanks, recycled tanks or refilling yourself.

Also consider that if you're printing mostly documents, or text and
graphics, that a monochrome laser will be a whole lot cheaper to operate.

Also, be aware that the Canons will produce VERY good quality using the
"fast" (draft) mode and use a lot less ink.

Thanks. I will try the fast draft mode.

 

[Talal Itani]

If you want a wide format printer that uses pigment ink and is able to get
better ink mileage then look at the Epson 3800. The printer will print a
16x20 and has super sized ink tanks. Each tank costs over $50 but is
meant for heavy semi pro use.

The Epson 3800 is the printer I am contemplating. Is there a way to compare
ink consumption between the Epson 3800 and the Canons 8?

Thanks,

 

[measekite]

Epsons consume a good deal more ink than Canons do. Your best solution will
be compatible tanks, recycled tanks or refilling yourself.

Do not listen to the Theory for Debate. While the Epson printers for
the most part are not as thrifty on ink as the Canon printers I would
never consider refilling or crap ink that can deliver poor results.,
have a higher risk of fading and can possibly clog your printer.

While I usually recommend Canon I think you should look at the Epson
3800. This is a semi professional 17" wide printer that has humongous
ink tanks that are not available on their standard printers. This is
truly a professional printer that has had good reviews. Google for
Luminious Landscape and read their review.

Also consider that if you're printing mostly documents, or text and
graphics, that a monochrome laser will be a whole lot cheaper to operate.

Also, be aware that the Canons will produce VERY good quality using the
"fast" (draft) mode and use a lot less ink.

I am a supporter of Canon products and I own one as well as an HP. The
Canon draft sucks. So the above statement is ridiculous. For text
draft mode the HP 9980Cse is almost as good as the Canon normal mode.

 

[measekite]

The Epson 3800 is the printer I am contemplating. Is there a way to compare
ink consumption between the Epson 3800 and the Canons 8?

The only other Canon in this class is the IPF5100. Again read the
reviews at Luminious Landscape. The Canon has more cartridges and they
are even substantially larger than the supersized Epson carts and cost a
lot more.

You will find many mavens posting in this ng but most and nearly all do
not know as much as they think they do and just about all of them let
their egos stand in the way.

 

[Frank]

Do not listen to the Theory for Debate.

So you disagree with yourself?
Amazing!

While the Epson printers for

the most part are not as thrifty on ink as the Canon printers I would
never consider refilling or crap ink that can deliver poor results.,
have a higher risk of fading and can possibly clog your printer.

What makes a brain dead austrian fascist atheist liar like you think
anyone believes one word from you about after market inks?
Especially since you've told us numerous times that..
*YOU'VE NEVER EVER USED ANY OF THEM*?
*MOST OF US IN THIS NG ARE NOT NEARLY AS DUMB AS YOU ARE*!

<--deleted the rest of this pathetic losers diatribe as a public service-->

 

[Frank]

The only other Canon in this class is the IPF5100. Again read the
reviews at Luminious Landscape. The Canon has more cartridges and they
are even substantially larger than the supersized Epson carts and cost a
lot more.

You will find many mavens posting in this ng but most and nearly all do
not know as much as they think they do and just about all of them let
their egos stand in the way.

Oh great! So now you're confessing, huh?
Wonderful, but save your breath...we all know who and what you are.
Oh and btw, get lost ok?

 

[tomm42]

The only other Canon in this class is the IPF5100.  Again read the
reviews at Luminious Landscape.  The Canon has more cartridges and they
are even substantially larger than the supersized Epson carts and cost a
lot more.

You will find many mavens posting in this ng but most and nearly all do
not know as much as they think they do and just about all of them let
their egos stand in the way.

The ink costs on the 17 inch printers is about 1/2 that of a 13 inch
printer. The Epson 3800 is around $.60 per ml and the Canon iPF5100
around $.55 per ml. The average 13 inch printer the inks cost around
$1.10 per ml. So you do save a lot with the larger printers. You can
save $ at the expense of convenience with third party inks, but the
ink sets on the 17 inch printers are true pro inksets with good life
expectancy, dependable profiles for almost all papers, and
professional support. If you look at the per print price from a 17
inch printer you find it is very reasonable with OEM inks, yes 3rd
party inks are cheaper but no where near as good for photo printing.
The Canon printers use a fraction of an ml less ink per square foot
than Epsons. The Canon doesn't clog unless you have a major failure,
the 3800 is known for not having the same clogging problems as the
earlier Epsons. The Canon iPF5100 is considerably larger and heavier
construction than the Epson, the Epson takes just a little more area
than a 13 inch printer. Canon takes roll paper while the Epson
doesn't. Check here for Canon info http://canonipf.wikispaces.com/
they have a printer comparison on the site. Check here for info on the
Epson 3800 http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html.

Tom

Tom

 

[measekite]

tomm42 wrote:

On Aug 28, 3:55&nbsp;pm, measekite &lt;[email protected]&gt; wrote:



Talal Itani wrote:



If you want a wide format printer that uses pigment ink and is able to get better ink mileage then look at the Epson 3800. &nbsp;The printer will print a 16x20 and has super sized ink tanks. &nbsp;Each tank costs over $50 but is meant for heavy semi pro use.



The Epson 3800 is the printer I am contemplating. &nbsp;Is there a way to compare ink consumption between the Epson 3800 and the Canons 8?



The only other Canon in this class is the IPF5100. &nbsp;Again read the reviews at Luminious Landscape. &nbsp;The Canon has more cartridges and they are even substantially larger than the supersized Epson carts and cost a lot more. You will find many mavens posting in this ng but most and nearly all do not know as much as they think they do and just about all of them let their egos stand in the way.



Thanks,



The ink costs on the 17 inch printers is about 1/2 that of a 13 inch printer. The Epson 3800 is around $.60 per ml and the Canon iPF5100 around $.55 per ml. The average 13 inch printer the inks cost around $1.10 per ml. So you do save a lot with the larger printers. You can save $ at the expense of convenience




with third party inks,

Not the same.&nbsp; It is like comparing bears and dogs.


but the ink sets on the 17 inch printers are true pro inksets with good life expectancy, dependable profiles for almost all papers, and professional support. If you look at the per print price from a 17 inch printer you find it is very reasonable with OEM inks,




yes 3rd party inks are cheaper but no where near as good for photo printing.

And they fade rapidly.


The Canon printers use a fraction of an ml less ink per square foot than Epsons. The Canon doesn't clog unless you have a major failure, the 3800 is known for not having the same clogging problems as the earlier Epsons. The Canon iPF5100 is considerably larger and heavier construction than the Epson, the Epson takes just a little more area than a 13 inch printer. Canon takes roll paper while the Epson doesn't. Check here for Canon info http://canonipf.wikispaces.com/ they have a printer comparison on the site. Check here for info on the Epson 3800 http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/index.html. Tom Tom

 

[Michael]

measekite wrote:

Frank,

Calling measkite dumb is so harsh. Lets use more clinical and less harsh
language.

Measkite is a retarded (mentally challenged) person with compulsive
obsessive disorder. He is faced with a very serious challenge in his
life. He feels about generic ink the way that Eichmann felt about jews.

The newsgroups are his only outlet to vent his frustrations about
generic ink taking over the world and polluting the aryan ink. If we
take this venue from him, he will explode.

The poor man has no sex life. This is all he's got.