Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

Reliability - old v new Epsons

Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-25 by Richard Smallfield

Hi,
I've been wondering how the newer Epsons such as the 2400 or the 2880 compare with the old ones like the 2100 for reliability.

Before just about every exhibition print I have to run a cleaning cycle on my 2100 (which has OEM ink). And even that doesn't guarantee a good print.

Yesterday I was printing an 850mm panorama and it was fine until the last 100mm, which had banding. What a waste of paper.

But I've grown to expect this sort of thing from my Epsons.

Have they improved with the 2880 or am I right to think that the HP9180 might indeed be a better option from this standpoint?

thanks,
Richard

--
richard smallfield photography
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://www.photoforum-nz.org/gallery/thumbnails.php?pageID=19&showID=50 

   "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at
   the same level of thinking we were at when we created
   them." 
   --Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-25 by danielstaver

Hi Richard!

Well, I upgraded to a 2400 earlier this year and have mixed feelings
about it. The print head probably needs replacement, as I have banding
problems that won't go away even when using the service utility. I've
read several accounts online of people having banding problems with
this printer, and the solution usually seems to be having the printer
serviced and the print head replaced. 

I've managed to get mostly decent results on Permajet Alpha which is
my favorite paper, but I can't make glossy prints without severe
banding, and even on Permajet Alpha there is fant banding in the
shadows and slight streaking in very smooth gradients.

The paper feed is definitely a step down from the 2100. It seems to
pick up paper dust more easily and I can't trust it to even pick up
regular office paper reliably. Wetting a piece of cloth and running
the paper feed a few times while holding the cloth in place to clean
the wheels helps a lot though. It will run well for a while after
doing such a cleaning. This procedure is recommended in the service
manual for the printer when having paper feed problems.

I don't like that there is no separate paper thickness setting like
there was on the 2100. The thickness is controlled by which paper you
select in the driver. It's usually not that big a problem though. For
the matte third party papers I've tried both Archival Matte and Velvet
Fine Art seems to produce good results in ABW mode.

I often have to run some head cleanings if the printer sits for
several days. But I haven't yet experienced a clog while printing. 

The printer was given to me for free - Even with the cost of a service
to have the print head replaced I will have saved a lot of money. But
if I paid full price for it I would not be happy with the current
banding problems and would have it replaced or serviced under warranty.

That said, I love ABW mode and the ability to make great BW prints
directly from Photoshop and the Epson driver instead of relying on
third party utilities and custom profiles.

I wouldn't something other than Epson simply for the lack of third
party inkset and CIS support. Running the 2400 on original inks would
be outrageously expensive, and I'm very happy with the CIS I'm using
on it. It's reducing my ink costs to almost 1/10 of the price.

There is also much better community supprt for the Epsons.

I'm considering a 3800 for my next upgrade. It's more expensive than
the 2400, but considering the included full 80ml inkset the price gap
is actually much smaller than it seems.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Richard
Smallfield <r.smallfield@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I've been wondering how the newer Epsons such as the 2400 or the
2880 compare with the old ones like the 2100 for reliability.
> 
> Before just about every exhibition print I have to run a cleaning
cycle on my 2100 (which has OEM ink). And even that doesn't guarantee
a good print.
> 
> Yesterday I was printing an 850mm panorama and it was fine until the
last 100mm, which had banding. What a waste of paper.
> 
> But I've grown to expect this sort of thing from my Epsons.
> 
> Have they improved with the 2880 or am I right to think that the
HP9180 might indeed be a better option from this standpoint?
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 
> thanks,
> Richard
> 
> --
> richard smallfield photography
> http://smallfield.vze.com
> http://www.photoforum-nz.org/gallery/thumbnails.php?pageID=19&showID=50 
> 
>    "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at
>    the same level of thinking we were at when we created
>    them." 
>    --Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
>

Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-25 by Harry Lockwood

SNIP

> I wouldn't something other than Epson simply for the lack of third
> party inkset and CIS support. Running the 2400 on original inks would
> be outrageously expensive, and I'm very happy with the CIS I'm using
> on it. It's reducing my ink costs to almost 1/10 of the price.
> 

SNIP

Daniel,

Which CIS system are you using?

Harry

Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-26 by Clayton Jones

Hello Richard,

>I've been wondering how the newer Epsons such as the 2400 or the 2880 
>compare with the old ones like the 2100 for reliability.

My own experience favors the newer.  I had a 2200 for almost exactly
two years.  One month from the expiration of the 2-year replacement
warranty the paper feed mechanism began serious and noisy
malfunctioning.  It clearly had worn out.  I swapped it for a 2400 in
August, 2005, so I'm now approaching three years with it.  My
experience with it has been fantastic.

Besides being a dream to use (ABW) and producing beautiful prints with
it's three K inks, it has never had a banding problem, has never
needed a head alignment, and has had only a few relatively minor
clogs, always after being idle for long periods (2-3 weeks).  My only
real complaint is sometimes it gets persnickity in feeding paper and
tries my patience.  But not always, it comes and goes...maybe it's the
phase of the moon.  

I've also found the ABW settings to be somewhat of a moving target. 
The tone often shifts a bit along the green/magenta scale when a new
cart is installed - differences in ink batches I suppose.  It's more
of an annoyance than a handicap and I've learned to live with it.  A
couple of small test prints tell me how much to adjust the horizontal
value and I'm back in business.   

Anyway, it has by far been the best printer I've ever had (four in a
6 year period).  All of it's use has been with the Epson inks.  It
has made countless prints, most of them letter size or smaller, and my
ink costs have averaged about $20/month.  I sell prints, so it has
more than paid it's way. 

Before the 2400, printing was mostly a frustrating struggle.  With the
2400 it's been pretty much printing Nirvana.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
I-Trak 2.1   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-26 by Mitch Greenwald

I have a 2200.  It needed a new pump, and since then has been 
excellent.  I don't have a 2400 or a 2880.  My evidence is anecdotal 
and secondhand, but it might be useful.

1.  My friend Peggy has had both.  She loves the prints from the 2400, 
but finds a a little cheesier and less reliable than the 2200.

2.  When I had the 2200 fixed, by a place that specializes in Epson 
repair, I spoke for quite a while with the tech mgr about the relative 
mechanical merits of the various models.  He felt that the 2400 was 
mechanically inferior to the 2200.  He thought that the 3800 was 
excellent mechanically, and that one wanting to upgrade from the 2200 
should consider going straight to the 3800  (this was not sales talk - 
he knew I wasn't in the market right then).  As someone pointed out, 
the cost difference isn't as great as it appears, because a lot more 
ink comes with the 3800.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
On Jul 25, 2008, at 11:22 PM, Clayton Jones wrote:

> Hello Richard,
>
>> I've been wondering how the newer Epsons such as the 2400 or the 2880
>> compare with the old ones like the 2100 for reliability.
>
> My own experience favors the newer.  I had a 2200 for almost exactly
> two years.  One month from the expiration of the 2-year replacement
> warranty the paper feed mechanism began serious and noisy
> malfunctioning.  It clearly had worn out.  I swapped it for a 2400 in
> August, 2005, so I'm now approaching three years with it.  My
> experience with it has been fantastic.
>
> Besides being a dream to use (ABW) and producing beautiful prints with
> it's three K inks, it has never had a banding problem, has never
> needed a head alignment, and has had only a few relatively minor
> clogs, always after being idle for long periods (2-3 weeks).  My only
> real complaint is sometimes it gets persnickity in feeding paper and
> tries my patience.  But not always, it comes and goes...maybe it's the
> phase of the moon.
>
> I've also found the ABW settings to be somewhat of a moving target.
> The tone often shifts a bit along the green/magenta scale when a new
> cart is installed - differences in ink batches I suppose.  It's more
> of an annoyance than a handicap and I've learned to live with it.  A
> couple of small test prints tell me how much to adjust the horizontal
> value and I'm back in business.
>
> Anyway, it has by far been the best printer I've ever had (four in a
> 6 year period).  All of it's use has been with the Epson inks.  It
> has made countless prints, most of them letter size or smaller, and my
> ink costs have averaged about $20/month.  I sell prints, so it has
> more than paid it's way.
>
> Before the 2400, printing was mostly a frustrating struggle.  With the
> 2400 it's been pretty much printing Nirvana.
>
> Regards,
> Clayton
>
>
> Info on black and white digital printing at
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> I-Trak 2.1   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
> resources as they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from 
> the membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
> removed from the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
> Owner and Moderators. See “Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the 
> Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” 
> AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
> LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, 
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, 
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE 
> LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
> RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, 
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF 
> YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD 
> PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-26 by danielstaver

I bought mine from http://www.squidtechnology.com/ - Great service,
and I got a very good price on the CIS I bought. 

Be aware that the price difference I mentioned is compared to local
Norwegian prices which are very expensive. Your mileage may vary...

The banding problems I'm having were clearly present before I switched
to a CIS by the way, so I don't suspect that's the cause of my problems.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > I wouldn't something other than Epson simply for the lack of third
> > party inkset and CIS support. Running the 2400 on original inks would
> > be outrageously expensive, and I'm very happy with the CIS I'm using
> > on it. It's reducing my ink costs to almost 1/10 of the price.
> > 
> Which CIS system are you using?

Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-26 by danielstaver

> clogs, always after being idle for long periods (2-3 weeks).  My only
> real complaint is sometimes it gets persnickity in feeding paper and
> tries my patience.  But not always, it comes and goes...maybe it's the
> phase of the moon.  

Have you tried the cleaning method outlined in the service manual? I
do notice a clear improvement every time I do that. I still feel the
overall quality of the paper feed mechanism is much lower than on the
2100 though.

What they recommend is stapling an alcohol dampened cloth to a
postcard and holding it securely in place while running the paper feed
mechanism several times, causing the paper feed wheels to rub against
the cloth. I only use water, but it still helps.

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-26 by Richard Smallfield

Re cleaning the rollers, what I've done is to spray window cleaner on a sheet of 13x19" proofing paper and press the paper feed button, then hold onto the paper so that the rollers skid on the paper for a second. And repeat this several times.

Richard

At 05:47 a.m. Sunday 27/07/2008, you wrote:

>> clogs, always after being idle for long periods (2-3 weeks). My only
>> real complaint is sometimes it gets persnickity in feeding paper and
>> tries my patience. But not always, it comes and goes...maybe it's the
>> phase of the moon. 
>
>Have you tried the cleaning method outlined in the service manual? I
>do notice a clear improvement every time I do that. I still feel the
>overall quality of the paper feed mechanism is much lower than on the
>2100 though.
>
>What they recommend is stapling an alcohol dampened cloth to a
>postcard and holding it securely in place while running the paper feed
>mechanism several times, causing the paper feed wheels to rub against
>the cloth. I only use water, but it still helps.
>
> 

--
richard smallfield photography
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://www.photoforum-nz.org/gallery/thumbnails.php?pageID=19&showID=50 

   "As soon as man does not take his existence for granted, but 
   beholds it as something unfathomably mysterious, thought 
   begins."
   --Albert Schweitzer, philosopher, physician, musician, 
   Nobelist (1875-1965)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-26 by Richard Smallfield

At 03:22 p.m. Saturday 26/07/2008, you wrote:
>One month from the expiration of the 2-year replacement
>warranty the paper feed mechanism began serious and noisy
>malfunctioning. It clearly had worn out. I swapped it for a 2400 in
>August, 2005, so I'm now approaching three years with it. My
>experience with it has been fantastic.

You swapped it? You must tell me where one can swap an old printer for a new one - in New Zealand all the shops expect us to pay for them  :)

It's amazing that you've never had a banding problem. In the last couple of days, I've printed something (one was a big panorama) and had banding appear halfway through the print. No laughing matter

Were you using OEM ink on your 2200?

Whatever ink we use I think paper is the major expense - I'll never go back to MIS as I have enough trouble keeping OEM ink flowing, let alone third party ink.

It it true to say that ink flow problems tend to get worse as printers get older?

thanks,
Richard

--
richard smallfield photography
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://www.photoforum-nz.org/gallery/thumbnails.php?pageID=19&showID=50 

   "640K ought to be enough for anybody. " 
   --Bill Gates (1955-), in 1981 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Digital BW] Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-27 by pr_roark

...
> Whatever ink we use I think paper is the major expense -

True.  I've noticed at least with Premier Art that their thinner 
paper (e.g., 200 gsm) is often just as good in image quality while 
being considerably cheaper.  The 205 Scrapbook is actually said to be 
the most archival by Epson.

> I'll never go back to MIS as I have enough trouble keeping 
>  OEM ink flowing, let alone third party ink.

I wish we had a good, objective way to measure this quality.  I think 
the matte paper only MIS Eboni-6 and home brew Carbon-6 are much less 
likely to clog than the glossy MIS inks, but I have no way to 
objectively compare to either other MIS inks or OEM inks.

My gut feeling is that the binder used in the inks is a major 
variable, and that glossy ink take more of it.  Glop is, after all, 
just the binder in the MIS ink scheme of things.  While I have 
assumed the Epson coated pigment approach is better for glossy 
prints, those pigs also have to stick to the paper.


> It it true to say that ink flow problems tend to get worse 
> as printers get older?

The 1280 appears to have had a noticeably higher problem rate that 
all those subsequent to that model.  In fact, the 2000P I had for a 
while seemed fine (2 1280s crashed on me).  I've thought maybe what 
happened is that Epson, when they went to pigments, found that a 
different type of internal filter or screen worked better with 
pigments.  Then they just used that new material or screening in all 
their heads subsequent to the 2000P.  But, I'm speculating.

My 2200 is very reliable and has been producing prints for quite a 
while now with very few problems.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Digital BW] Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-27 by danielstaver

> I'll never go back to MIS as I have enough trouble keeping OEM 
> ink flowing, let alone third party ink.

In that case, I would seriously consider the 3800. It includes the
equivalent of about six full sets of cartridges for a 2400. 

With Norwegian prices the 2400 actually comes out more expensive when
I include the ink.

Re: Reliability - old v new Epsons

2008-07-29 by Clayton Jones

Hello  Richard,

>You swapped it? You must tell me where one can swap an old printer 
>for a new one -

I bought it at Comp USA, and at the time they offered their own 2-year
full replacement warranty for an additional $69 (if it breaks they
replace it with a new one, or if not available, the full purchase
value toward it's successor).  It broke with 30 days left on the
warranty, so I hauled it over there and told my story.  I'd paid about
$700 for it, including sales tax, and they credited that entire amount
toward a new 2400, which was $849 at the time.  So the 2400 cost me
about $150.00.  I bought the warranty for the 2400 as well, but it has
outlived it.


>It's amazing that you've never had a banding problem. 

It's been a truly wonderful printer.  Actually though, there have been
remarkably few problem reports for the 2400 here in this forum over
the years.  I recall that banding, head alignment and cleaning tips
were common discussion threads for the 2200 (it's probably because
most 2200s were used with MIS inks, while most 2400s are used with K3
inks [that's my perception from forum comments]).


>Were you using OEM ink on your 2200?

No, only Eboni for BO and a variety of MIS combinations I experimented
with during those two years (UT7, UTx3, 2K, etc).  Clogs, cleaning,
refilling, leaky carts, bad chips and a relatively constant level of
aggravation and annoyance were a normal part of printing and consumed
significant amounts of time and energy (not to mention ink and paper).
 All of that came to an abrupt halt when the 2400 arrived and I'm
still living happily ever after <g>.  I'm actually able to concentrate
on photography.


>It it true to say that ink flow problems tend to get worse as 
>printers get older?

Hmmm, I can't say that I've ever had that perception.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
I-Trak 2.1   http://www.cjcom.net/itrak.htm

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.