Digital BW, The Print

How does the Epson R2400 with K3 ink compare to the 1280 with MIS 
UT2?

I print color and b&w, but the challenge seems to be getting a good 
inkjet b&w print. I'm considering an R2400, and the 1280 which I can 
get for a very good price. I have been searching for some time, and 
it appears that the 1280 with ut2 inks would be about as good as a 
2200. I haven't seen enough reports on the R2400 with Epson K3 ink 
to really know how well it does with b&w. I have read reviews, but 
it seems that every time a new printer comes out, there are terrific 
reviews. Also, I wouldn't want to spend more than $50 or so for a 
RIP. Price is a big factor in my decision right now.

I know I will waste ink with the 1280 switching between color and 
b&w. I would use up a cart before I switched. I could also print 
with b&w for several carts before switching to color, and vice 
versa. I realize I will have to live with the inconvenience of not 
being able to make one print without switching ink, sometimes. I do 
have an R200 that I can use for everyday prints, documents, etc. 
Would the money saved by buying the 1280 ($500-600+) justify the 
wasted ink costs? I expect I would want to upgrade to a better 
printer in a year or two (maybe 17" wide). I also realize that the 
R2400 is just a better printer, and probably more reliable. 

Also, has anyone used the MIS pigment color inks for the 1280? I 
realize that's somewhat "off topic" here, sorry!


Thanks in advance for your thoughts, suggestions, and advice.

Mike

Mike,

 
> How does the Epson R2400 with K3 ink compare to the 1280 with MIS
> UT2?

Just comparing the B&w output, the R2400 is slightly smoother and gives one
more control over the tone of the print -- which can be a double edged
sword.  At normal viewing distance, a well done print from either will look
excellent.

The UT2 appears to be more lightfast.  I'll have an update on this in a few
hours.



> ... Price is a big factor in my decision right now.
> 
> ... I expect I would want to upgrade to a better
> printer in a year or two (maybe 17" wide). 

If you can live with 8x10 for a while, consider the R220.  It can usually be
bought for less than $70 and is outstanding for small prints.  I have a
Readme on it at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/R220_R2_Readme.htm, with other
printers discussed at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/index.htm.  

 
> Also, has anyone used the MIS pigment color inks for the 1280? 

Lots of people do this.  They work fine.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Thanks for the reply!
It sounds like the R2400 with K3 would have the edge, here. Would it 
be a good choice for duotones, split tones, etc? I read a review 
that said that couldn't be done, but I have doubts about that. This 
could be the deciding factor. I use P.S.7, and have downloaded some 
curves (split tones, etc) intended for the 2200 which I'm using with 
my R200. I havn't learned to create my own curves yet, but I intend 
to.

Thanks for the links. They worked fine when I removed the comma, and 
period. ;)  I have been reading your website, and your research is 
one of the reasons I was considering the 1280 with UT2.

Epson claims 200+ years for b&w, does that sound realistic? What is 
your estimate for UT2? With which paper? I understand that the paper 
could be the limiting factor here. I will probably use matte paper 
most of the time. Both inksets would be considered "archival" with 
the right paper, correct? 


Thanks again, for the help.
Mike








--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>
> Mike,
> 
>  
> > How does the Epson R2400 with K3 ink compare to the 1280 with MIS
> > UT2?
> 
> Just comparing the B&w output, the R2400 is slightly smoother and 
gives one
> more control over the tone of the print -- which can be a double 
edged
> sword.  At normal viewing distance, a well done print from either 
will look
> excellent.
> 
> The UT2 appears to be more lightfast.  I'll have an update on this 
in a few
> hours.
> 
> 
> 
> > ... Price is a big factor in my decision right now.
> > 
> > ... I expect I would want to upgrade to a better
> > printer in a year or two (maybe 17" wide). 
> 
> If you can live with 8x10 for a while, consider the R220.  It can 
usually be
> bought for less than $70 and is outstanding for small prints.  I 
have a
> Readme on it at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/R220_R2_Readme.htm, 
with other

> printers discussed at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/index.htm.  
> 
>  
> > Also, has anyone used the MIS pigment color inks for the 1280? 
> 
> Lots of people do this.  They work fine.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

I've used several 1280's with MIS inks for about four years. They
print just about as good as anything. And the color with the new MIS
PRO inks makes the 1280's color about as good as the newer printers.
You do need a custom printer profile for the MIS PRO ink. A 1280 is a
higher maintance printer and doesn't last forever. I seem to get a
couple years of good use out of one. But the refurbs are $225 (after
rebate, free shipping) from Epson so it's hard to beat the price. 

No doubt the 2400 is a better printer overall. But it's a $800 printer
vs a $225 one. And it will take a very critical viewer who knows both
printers well to be able to tell the quality difference between one
and the other.

You waste very little ink switching from b&w to color and back. 

Given the price differential, I'd suggest the 1280 for you. 

FWIW, my current 1280 is developing a paper feed problem and I'm
considering replacing it with a 2400. But I still don't regret buying
that 2nd 1280 two years ago. 

Bob Michaels

 --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Roma"
<Mike_Roma@m...> wrote:

>
> How does the Epson R2400 with K3 ink compare to the 1280 with MIS 
> UT2?
> 
> I print color and b&w, but the challenge seems to be getting a good 
> inkjet b&w print. I'm considering an R2400, and the 1280 which I can 
> get for a very good price. I have been searching for some time, and 
> it appears that the 1280 with ut2 inks would be about as good as a 
> 2200. I haven't seen enough reports on the R2400 with Epson K3 ink 
> to really know how well it does with b&w. I have read reviews, but 
> it seems that every time a new printer comes out, there are terrific 
> reviews. Also, I wouldn't want to spend more than $50 or so for a 
> RIP. Price is a big factor in my decision right now.
> 
> I know I will waste ink with the 1280 switching between color and 
> b&w. I would use up a cart before I switched. I could also print 
> with b&w for several carts before switching to color, and vice 
> versa. I realize I will have to live with the inconvenience of not 
> being able to make one print without switching ink, sometimes. I do 
> have an R200 that I can use for everyday prints, documents, etc. 
> Would the money saved by buying the 1280 ($500-600+) justify the 
> wasted ink costs? I expect I would want to upgrade to a better 
> printer in a year or two (maybe 17" wide). I also realize that the 
> R2400 is just a better printer, and probably more reliable. 
> 
> Also, has anyone used the MIS pigment color inks for the 1280? I 
> realize that's somewhat "off topic" here, sorry!
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance for your thoughts, suggestions, and advice.
> 
> Mike
>

Mike Roma  wrote:
>
> How does the Epson R2400 with K3 ink compare to the 1280 with MIS 
> UT2?

If you are printing with Matte papers, the 2400 has no real advantage. If you are printing with 
glossy/luster papers, the 2400/K3 inks demonstrate a visible improvement in dMax and 
simply look great.

IMHO buying a 2400 for use with either matte papers or 3rd party inks is a waste of money 
unless you don;t have access to another printer. That said, I use a 2200 for matte prints, and 
a 4800 for glossy -- the ink costs are much less on the larger printer. I am really liking the 
deep blacks of the K3 inks.

Jonathan

Thanks for all the information. I believe I'm going to order the 1280. 
The refurb'd unit with rebate is right in my budget! Next I'll call 
MIS and order some UT2, and MISPRO inks. 

Does MIS have a profile for the MISPRO/1280 availabe for download yet?

Mike, 
Before you buy a 1280, please read my recent post and the followups 
about this printer from over about a week ago. 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/message/715
97

It's digest# 71597.  You also might Google the words "1280 clog" and 
get ready to spend many, many hours with the results. I would NOT 
recommend buying a 1280 for pigmented inks. I used the MIS color 
archival pigment inks along with the Eboni black, with few clogs or 
problems over the last 2 years, very little use (less than 1 
print/week), and suddenly recently after only 2 years, the printer is 
dead. This printer is NO GOOD for pigment inks, as it has proved to 
me, 
and countless others on this list and elsewhere. I agree with Paul's 
advice on the 2000P...I remember doing some work with a woman several 
years ago who used this printer, and I recall she made many very nice 
prints using that printer. I'm considering a used 2200 (now that I've 
calmed 
down), which is apparently designed for pigment inks and I would 
guess 
to be a good affordable choice in today's used market.

Mark

For Paul,

I could not find your original message on this subject so I apologize
for repetition. But, do I understand you to say that the 1280 with MIS
color pigment inks produces results comparable to those with the 2400
and Epson inks? Color and permanence?

I've been using 2 1280s, one for B&W, one for color. I'm considering
replacing the latter with a 2400 but if I read you correctly, this
would be unnecessary.

Thank you.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>
> Mike,
> 
>  
> > How does the Epson R2400 with K3 ink compare to the 1280 with MIS
> > UT2?
> 
> Just comparing the B&w output, the R2400 is slightly smoother and
gives one
> more control over the tone of the print -- which can be a double edged
> sword.  At normal viewing distance, a well done print from either
will look
> excellent.
> 
> The UT2 appears to be more lightfast.  I'll have an update on this
in a few
> hours.
> 
> 
> 
> > ... Price is a big factor in my decision right now.
> > 
> > ... I expect I would want to upgrade to a better
> > printer in a year or two (maybe 17" wide). 
> 
> If you can live with 8x10 for a while, consider the R220.  It can
usually be
> bought for less than $70 and is outstanding for small prints.  I have a
> Readme on it at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/R220_R2_Readme.htm,
with other

> printers discussed at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/index.htm.  
> 
>  
> > Also, has anyone used the MIS pigment color inks for the 1280? 
> 
> Lots of people do this.  They work fine.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

> Paul, ... do I understand you to say that the 1280 with MIS
> color pigment inks produces results comparable to those with the 2400
> and Epson inks? Color and permanence?

No, I deal with the B&W inks -- UT2, for example, on the 1280.  I use MIS
color pigments, but have not compared them to the 2400 with respect to gamut
and lightfastness (aside from a B&W print made with the 2400 and MIS 2400
("K4") inks).  Of course, no 1280 with color inks can touch the 2400 or 1280
with UT2 with respect to B&W output.  Whether a 1280 with MIS color pigments
can make a color print equal to a 2400 color print is not an issue I've
addressed or explored.

 
> I've been using 2 1280s, one for B&W, one for color. I'm considering
> replacing the latter with a 2400 but if I read you correctly, this
> would be unnecessary.

I theory the 2400's gray inks would provide better neutral tones within
color images.  How important this is in real world printing is not an issue
I've looked into. 


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I don't believe MIS has any MISPRO profiles available for download.
Just spend $40 and have one made. I got mine from Cathysprofiles.com
and am very happy with all the profiles she has made for me. 

I cannot explain why some like Mark have clogging problems with 1280's
and pigment and I have not using them for 4 years. It does appear that
after a few years they either need major cleaning or replacement when
using pigments. It's the price that makes them attractive, cost of
ownership is about $100 a year. And prints that look about the same.
No question the 2400 is a better printer. It should be for the price. 

I'm contemplating yet another 1280 vs paying the price for a 2400. 

Bob Michaels

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Roma"
<Mike_Roma@m...> wrote:

>
> Thanks for all the information. I believe I'm going to order the 1280. 
> The refurb'd unit with rebate is right in my budget! Next I'll call 
> MIS and order some UT2, and MISPRO inks. 
> 
> Does MIS have a profile for the MISPRO/1280 availabe for download yet?
>