Digital BW, The Print

"The R800 blows the 2200 out of the water..."

> Sorry for being skeptical but that comment seems fantastic.  Could 
you elaborate?  How so?


Well of course I must hedge by stating that this is my opinion. 
The gamut of blues is extended over that of my 2200. The 
dither pattern, dot size and resolution is finer, and not having to 
change out photo/matte black cartridges, at least for me, is a big 
deal. I have to do that a lot on my 2200 and not only is it kind of a 
hassle but I think its costing me about a buck in ink every time I do 
it (granted, nothing compared to the $100 a pop in ink it costs in 
the 7600). Also, the R800 prints faster than my 2200 and can print on 
a CD whereas the 2200 is not capable of that. Out of the box the 2200 
is unusable for BW printing due to color casts and metamerism, 
whereas the R800 prints BW very, very well. And last but not 
least, my 2200 is unusable for printing on glossy paper due to 
bronzing (PrintGuard will work on semigloss but its an extra step, 
smelly, and a hassle); but the R800 with its no hassle clear coating 
really shines (pardon the expression) in this regard -- the glossy 
prints are just beautiful.

The one big (again, pardon the expression) advantage the 2200 has 
over the R800 is that it can print at SuperA3 (13x19) size. So, 
that's why I say except for the size the R800 is a much better 
printer than my 2200.