Digital BW, The Print

Having spent the last six months using a 2400, I received a 4800 
yesterday and have it set up, just now, with some QTR ICC profiles 
for VFA, EEM and HPR.  Since so many are using one or the other of 
these printers, I thought I'd give my impressions of the comparison.

1.  The 4800 seems like a huge leap in apparent technology over the 
2400 and at $1,400 (that rebate last month) it seems like a steal.
2.  The driver in the 4800 is more awkward (Windows):  type of feed, 
orientation, etc. are not savable in a workflow.  This seems odd and 
irritating.  The feed route (top manual, tray, etc.) must be selected 
before anything else or certain papers and ABW are unavailable. (Am I 
wrong on this?)  
3.  The top manual feed slot is very fussy and difficult to use,  
rejecting paper because it was not inserted "deeply" or it is 
crooked.  The alternative, the front manual slot, requires a good 15 
inches behind the printer and I don't have the space for that.  Even 
this loading is hardly the height of convenience.  The EEM tray 
loading (holds about 75 sheets I think) is a delight.
4.  The size of the ink carts in the 4800 is a huge relief.  They are 
three quarters the size of a VHS tape.  I had been stocking 30-40 
carts for the 2400 and changing them *constantly*.
5.  Surprisingly, the 4800 seems a bit slower in cranking out a print 
(2880, unidirectional).
6.  The 4800 has linearized and separated the shadows on HPR, which 
was a problem with the 2400, which showed shadow reversals.  The new 
values for 90-100% blacks are (followed in parentheses by the 2400 
figures: 24.52 (21.56); 21.67 (19.63); 20.10 (18.39); 18.94 (17.77); 
17.57 (17.79); 16.53 (17.77).  So this is a much better performance 
from the 4800.  (Unfortunateloy the dmax at 16.53 is still pretty 
poor.)
7.  The corresponding VFA figures are good too:  26.13 (24.67); 23.05 
(22.72); 21.08 (20.68); 18.81 (18.63); 16.36 (16.66); 14.15 (14.19).  
The separation here is, I think, really visible in the prints (as it 
is with the HPR).  What do people think of a 90% black coming in at 
L* 26.13?  The unmanaged scale from top to bottom is quite linear, 
with fewer little irregularities than on the 2400 and a straighter 
curve.
8.  I had expected the visible output of the two printers to be 
identical, but they are not.  The differences are slight, but there 
is a tonal smoothness and lack of "grain" in the 4800 images (as well 
as those lucid shadows) that is immediately apparent side-by-side.  I 
wouldn't get a 4800 for this reason (I got it for ink costs mostly), 
but it's nice to have and it is an improvement.  The 4800 appears to 
have *much* more sophisticated head alignment routines and it is also 
holding the paper flat with suction.

So those are my observations and questions so far.  And once again, 
thank you Roy for those profiles!

Walt