Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 19 posts | 
by Mark Picard on Thu Jun 30, 2016 11:14 am
User avatar
Mark Picard
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Location: Northern Maine
My Epson 4880 printer is finally showing signs of wear as I can no longer feed sheet paper through it, but the roll paper still performs perfectly. I LOVE this printer and have run thousands and thousands of prints through it in the last 10 years, but I think it will be too expensive to repair and I might just be better off money-wise getting a new model to replace it. But here in lies the problem - I don't see a comparable printer to replace the 4880 with. The P800 series only has 80ml ink cartridges compared to my 220ml on the 4880. Gotta' be way more expensive to run as far as ink goes by comparison! Also, to run rolls on the P800 you need the optional roll kit that does not offer automatic cutting of the rolls, another bummer compared to the 4880. Cost is really not a factor. How about maybe a Canon (although I prefer Epson}? I see that the Epson 4900 is still available, but that printer has been around for a few years now, although I'm sure it would produce excellent prints comparable to my 4880. Your thoughts Royce, or anyone else? 
Mark Picard
Website:  http://www.markpicard.com
Maine Photography Workshops
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Jun 30, 2016 12:53 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86760
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
I think the P6000 is more along the lines of what you are looking for. The P800 is really more the replacement for the 3880.
 

by Wayne Fox on Thu Jun 30, 2016 1:29 pm
Wayne Fox
Forum Contributor
Posts: 23
Joined: 17 Mar 2011
The 4900 is the replacement for the 4880, and both are pretty old designs. Unfortunately the 4900 hasn’t been a stellar performer when it comes to missing nozzles and related issues. Rumor has it Epson replaced the capping station somewhere along the line so more recent 4900’s are less problematic than the first ones, but this is anecdotal and I don’t have any real proof.

several rumors say Epson is not planing on updating the 4900 to the new inkset, Of course those are rumors and could be totally wrong, they could announce a new p5000 next week. If not, I assume this means they feel the p800 is an adequate replacement. The p800 is an excellent printer and appears to continue the legacy of the 38xx series which are the most maintenance /clog free printers epson (or anyone for that matter) has ever produced, but has the issues you mentioned (roll feed is extra and does not cut, only 80ml ink cartridges).

So the options other than p800 would be a p6000 or p7000, quite a bit larger, but does give you 24” width capability and the new Epson inkset which is really outstanding. going with Canon you really don’t gain anything, because they don’t have a printer similar to the 4900 either, the ipf5xxx format seems to be abandoned by them, so you can either go with a smaller Canon Pixma printer which is more limiting than a p800, or the ipf64xx series which is comparable in size to the p6000 or p7000.
 

by signgrap on Thu Jun 30, 2016 3:28 pm
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
Mark it sounds like you do a fair amount of printing. Is that correct?
If the answer is yes then a P6000 24" wide or P7000 44" wide would be the printer of choice. I have a P800 which E.J. has pointed out is the successor to the 3800/3880 printers. The P800 is designed for someone who DOES NOT PRINT REGULARLY. As I understand it Epson will NOT be making a professional 17" wide printer that will replace the 4800/4880/4900 professional 17" printers of the past. I spent some time talking with Epson when looking for a replacement for my 4800 printer. At the time (late December 2015) I was told that there is no replacement for the 17" professional models of the past. The P800 which is 17", is NOT considered a professional printer by Epson. It was designed to be a printer suitable for someone who does professional quality printing but it does not meet the standards / requirements of someone who is professional printing i.e. printing at least 4 or more times  a week. According to Epson the biggest problems people had with their 17" professional printers was nozzle clogging. Again according to Epson the reason people had these nozzle clogging problems was that the printers were not used frequently enough. In my own experience I can validate Epson's claims about clogging due to the printer not being used frequently enough. So if you do print frequently enough and you can justify the price the P6000 is a good choice. But if you want a 17" printer than the only option is a P800. Just be for warned the P800 IS NOT a professional printer. It is half the weight of a 4880 enough said. The P800 puts out nice prints although I find I need to do a bit more adjustments to match my monitor than I did with my 4800. Luminous Landscapes had a well balanced review by Mark Segal:
https://luminous-landscape.com/new-epso ... on+SC+P800 
Dick Ludwig
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Jun 30, 2016 3:44 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86760
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
The 4900 WAS the replacement for the 4880, it is not now the replacement for it.  Basically they have moved the P800 upmarket slightly but if you need bigger ink carts similar to a 4880/4900 or even bigger, then the P6000 is your entry into that level of printer.

Here are the current Epson Professional imaging printers:
http://t.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Pro/Home.do?UseCookie=yes&oid=0

Also, don't rule out Canon professional photo printers:
https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/port ... o-fine-art
 

by Mark Picard on Sun Jul 17, 2016 10:27 am
User avatar
Mark Picard
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Location: Northern Maine
E.J. Peiker wrote:The 4900 WAS the replacement for the 4880, it is not now the replacement for it.  Basically they have moved the P800 upmarket slightly but if you need bigger ink carts similar to a 4880/4900 or even bigger, then the P6000 is your entry into that level of printer.

Here are the current Epson Professional imaging printers:
http://t.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Pro/Home.do?UseCookie=yes&oid=0

Also, don't rule out Canon professional photo printers:
https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/list/professional-large-format-printers/professional-photo-fine-art/professional-photo-fine-art
Sorry for the late response, as I was out of town until now. I failed to mention that I already have a Epson 9900 printer also. I primarily use the 9900 for my canvas printing, and although I know I can print on paper on this machine too, I prefer to leave it set up for canvas rolls instead of constantly switching it over each time I change between paper and canvas. This is why I have the 4880 in the studio. I can leave the 9900 set up for canvas and use the 4880 for my paper printing, which rarely exceeds 17" wide. Because I also print a fair amount of greeting cards the 4880 used to handle that quite well until I lost the ability to sheet feed on the 4880. There is no paper tray available on the 9900, making printing cards almost impossible and certainly not efficient! A while ago some one asked about a Epson printer that was very good at small prints and some one recommended a model Epson in the $200 dollar range. Does any one remember the model number of that printer? My 4880 still works great using the roll paper, so maybe I should just get that cheap printer to do my greeting cards only. I tried to search for that topic, but had no success. Thanks for everyone's responses!
Mark Picard
Website:  http://www.markpicard.com
Maine Photography Workshops
 

by Royce Howland on Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:51 am
User avatar
Royce Howland
Forum Contributor
Posts: 11719
Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Member #:00460
Mark, because of the issues with the Epson x900 series, I would not recommend the 4900 as a 4880 replacement, even if it wasn't so old by now. I also can't imagine that any $200 Epson printer would be a good purchase for reliable, volume cut sheet printing, or for quality / longevity of what it would produce.

Essentially there is no direct replacement for a retired 4880 or the flawed 4900, and quite possibly there never will be. The P800 is the only current model that's an approximate replacement, but it's a much lighter weight pro-sumer model that's more of a replacement for the 3880. Optional roll support, no roll media cutter, lighter paper transport with no vacuum system, much smaller ink cartridges, etc.

Canon doesn't have anything either. Their 4880 equivalent was the very old iPF5100, which never got updated when Canon produced new head / ink designs for their x200, x300 and x400 series. Canon now has a new series rolling out, which includes the Pro-1000 desktop 17" printer. It's even more limited than the Epson P800, in that it has no roll support at all and a hardwired driver limitation on print length of something like 22". It doesn't look like we're going to see another pro spec 17" desktop model from anyone for the foreseeable future.

If you want to keep a smaller desktop unit for cut sheet paper prints, cards and the like, I suspect you'll have to split out your cut sheet and roll media into dedicated printers, much as you've already done with the 9900 for canvas. Either use the 9900 for all roll work including paper, or look at a new 24" floor-standing model for the roll-fed paper media. With say the P800 for cut sheets. The more dedicated specialized printers you take on, the more it starts to get expensive, inconvenient and over-consuming of space. It's not just more costly to acquire the equipment, but also to stock the multiplicity of ink cartridges. And it's more difficult to deal with recovery if one goes down & the others can't take over the same duties with anything like the same productivity.

The heavy duty 17" models were ideal for people needing to print smaller sizes, but with a professional duty cycle-supporting machine that would take a robust combination of roll and cut sheet media. It seems like both Epson and Canon have decided that market no longer exists in profitable form. Or else they wish to serve it by forcing those customers up to the 24" floor-standing models and in so doing abandon the flexibility of cut sheet handling, or cause them to also buy 17" desktop models in addition...
Royce Howland
 

by Mark Picard on Mon Jul 18, 2016 10:40 am
User avatar
Mark Picard
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Location: Northern Maine
Royce Howland wrote:Mark, because of the issues with the Epson x900 series, I would not recommend the 4900 as a 4880 replacement, even if it wasn't so old by now. I also can't imagine that any $200 Epson printer would be a good purchase for reliable, volume cut sheet printing, or for quality / longevity of what it would produce.

Essentially there is no direct replacement for a retired 4880 or the flawed 4900, and quite possibly there never will be. The P800 is the only current model that's an approximate replacement, but it's a much lighter weight pro-sumer model that's more of a replacement for the 3880. Optional roll support, no roll media cutter, lighter paper transport with no vacuum system, much smaller ink cartridges, etc.

Canon doesn't have anything either. Their 4880 equivalent was the very old iPF5100, which never got updated when Canon produced new head / ink designs for their x200, x300 and x400 series. Canon now has a new series rolling out, which includes the Pro-1000 desktop 17" printer. It's even more limited than the Epson P800, in that it has no roll support at all and a hardwired driver limitation on print length of something like 22". It doesn't look like we're going to see another pro spec 17" desktop model from anyone for the foreseeable future.

If you want to keep a smaller desktop unit for cut sheet paper prints, cards and the like, I suspect you'll have to split out your cut sheet and roll media into dedicated printers, much as you've already done with the 9900 for canvas. Either use the 9900 for all roll work including paper, or look at a new 24" floor-standing model for the roll-fed paper media. With say the P800 for cut sheets. The more dedicated specialized printers you take on, the more it starts to get expensive, inconvenient and over-consuming of space. It's not just more costly to acquire the equipment, but also to stock the multiplicity of ink cartridges. And it's more difficult to deal with recovery if one goes down & the others can't take over the same duties with anything like the same productivity.

The heavy duty 17" models were ideal for people needing to print smaller sizes, but with a professional duty cycle-supporting machine that would take a robust combination of roll and cut sheet media. It seems like both Epson and Canon have decided that market no longer exists in profitable form. Or else they wish to serve it by forcing those customers up to the 24" floor-standing models and in so doing abandon the flexibility of cut sheet handling, or cause them to also buy 17" desktop models in addition...
Yuk - well thanks for the reality of it all Royce! I kinda' got that idea when I researched on my own, I really only need a cut sheet printer for doing greeting cards, as I mentioned in my last post my 4880 still is working great for anything roll related (which I do all of my smaller, commercial type prints). The 9900 handles everything larger, including canvas. The Epson $200. printer that was discussed in another thread I would only use for the greeting cards, so longevity would not be an issue. I can't seem to locate that thread however. Thanks for your help, and I will keep searching! 
Mark Picard
Website:  http://www.markpicard.com
Maine Photography Workshops
 

by signgrap on Mon Jul 18, 2016 2:08 pm
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
Mark if all you need it for is greeting cards have you looked at an Epson P600.
I have the P800 which is the next size up but otherwise the same, I think.
I print my wife's photo cards using Red River 7"x10" card stock which makes a 5"x7" card when folded.
The sheets don't feed as well as they did on my Epson 4800 because the card's have an embossed groove that makes it easy to fold, BUT this groove tends to catch on the card behind it causing both sheets to feed at the same time. This never happened on the 4800 as it used a completely different feed path in the printer. I have tried fanning the paper and all the things they suggest but have not yet found a solution other than feeding them one at a time. But then I have not worked on the problem very long as I only printed cards once and didn't have time to play around.
Dick Ludwig
 

by Mark Picard on Mon Jul 18, 2016 3:33 pm
User avatar
Mark Picard
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Location: Northern Maine
signgrap wrote:Mark if all you need it for is greeting cards have you looked at an Epson P600.
I have the P800 which is the next size up but otherwise the same, I think.
I print my wife's photo cards using Red River 7"x10" card stock which makes a 5"x7" card when folded.
The sheets don't feed as well as they did on my Epson 4800 because the card's have an embossed groove that makes it easy to fold, BUT this groove tends to catch on the card behind it causing both sheets to feed at the same time. This never happened on the 4800 as it used a completely different feed path in the printer. I have tried fanning the paper and all the things they suggest but have not yet found a solution other than feeding them one at a time. But then I have not worked on the problem very long as I only printed cards once and didn't have time to play around.


Thanks Dick for the info. I too use Red River's 7x10 card stock. Although feeding one at a time seems time consuming, I guess I would not be against doing that if I ran into a problem with the P800/600. Using the paper tray on the 4880 used to be a breeze, and I have to say I will miss doing it using it with the ability to put 20-30 cards in there and letting it do it's thing. I'll just do all of my card printing all at once and it won't hurt as bad! :)
Mark Picard
Website:  http://www.markpicard.com
Maine Photography Workshops
 

by signgrap on Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:13 pm
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
Mark since I wrote the above response I am thinking of trying something the next time I print cards. I have a small wood roller that is used to roll wallpaper seams flat. I think, I'm going to roll the back of the card (the bump out of the groove) and see if I can flatten the bump so it doesn't stick out. The card should fold as easily but if I'm successful in flattening the bump this may prevent it from sticking/hooking the card under it so it isn't drawn into the printer with the sheet being printed. It should be fairly easy to roll the grooves - not taking much time. But if this works you should be able to print 10 cards at a time with no need to feed sheets one at a time. My P800 works like a charm printing regular (non card) paper.

It also occurred to me that the card stock I currently have was discounted as seconds. Perhaps the reason they were seconds is that the bump stuck out more than it should have. The cards feed fine in the 4800 but not the P800. Don't know if this is the case, just a thought.
Dick Ludwig
 

by ericbowles on Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:06 am
User avatar
ericbowles
Forum Contributor
Posts: 11
Joined: 20 Sep 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
I have had the Epson 4900 since it was released. Even now the technology of the inks is pretty good and it makes wonderful prints.

The clogging issue was due to two reasons - infrequent printing and a problem with the pump. They have changed the part number for the pump twice and are now on the third part number. The pump is replaced for around $450.

I think the options today are the P6000 and the P800. The P800 would be for moderately frequent printing and the P6000 for more frequent printing. Either way, a weekly print is a very good idea to maintain the printer. They handle high volume printing much better than low volumes.
Eric Bowles
BowlesImages
 

by signgrap on Tue Sep 06, 2016 11:08 am
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
ericbowles wrote:I have had the Epson 4900 since it was released.  Even now the technology of the inks is pretty good and it makes wonderful prints.

The clogging issue was due to two reasons - infrequent printing and a problem with the pump.  They have changed the part number for the pump twice and are now on the third part number.  The pump is replaced for around $450.

I think the options today are the P6000 and the P800.  The P800 would be for moderately frequent printing and the P6000 for more frequent printing.  Either way, a weekly print is a very good idea to maintain the printer.  They handle high volume printing much better than low volumes.
The P6000 needs to be used a couple of times a week if you want to prevent clogging. The P800 can go much longer between use as the printer is designed as prosumer printer. The P6000 as a pro printer needs regular use of at least 2 times a week. At least this is the way it was explained to me Epson.
Dick Ludwig
 

by prairiewing on Sat Jan 14, 2017 9:16 am
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 404
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
Mark Picard wrote:My Epson 4880 printer is finally showing signs of wear as I can no longer feed sheet paper through it, but the roll paper still performs perfectly. I LOVE this printer and have run thousands and thousands of prints through it in the last 10 years, but I think it will be too expensive to repair and I might just be better off money-wise getting a new model to replace it. But here in lies the problem - I don't see a comparable printer to replace the 4880 with. The P800 series only has 80ml ink cartridges compared to my 220ml on the 4880. Gotta' be way more expensive to run as far as ink goes by comparison! Also, to run rolls on the P800 you need the optional roll kit that does not offer automatic cutting of the rolls, another bummer compared to the 4880. Cost is really not a factor. How about maybe a Canon (although I prefer Epson}? I see that the Epson 4900 is still available, but that printer has been around for a few years now, although I'm sure it would produce excellent prints comparable to my 4880. Your thoughts Royce, or anyone else? 


I faced the same problem Mark.  Does this look like a good solution?
https://epson.com/For-Work/Printers/Lar ... /SCP5000CE
Pat Gerlach
 

by mstolting on Sat Jan 14, 2017 7:56 pm
User avatar
mstolting
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Salem, Oregon
Pat,

Have you seen this?

http://news.epson.com/news/epson-introd ... et-printer

Mike Stolting
"Le temps est un grand maître, dit-on, le malheur est qu'il tue ses élèves."
Berlioz
 

by E.J. Peiker on Sun Jan 15, 2017 8:10 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86760
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Note that Epson just introduced the 4900 replacement - the P5000

See link in the post above.
 

by signgrap on Sun Jan 15, 2017 11:39 am
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
This Epson P5000 printer looks very interesting. 
But one thing I'd check before getting one - how often does the printer have to be used to prevent nozzle clogging?
Previously Epsom professional printers needed to be used at least 2 times a week in order to prevent nozzle clogging. The new inks and nozzle coatings look promising but do they have the long tubing that required frequent (at least twice a week) use in order to prevent the inks from settling in the downward loops of the tubes? When I purchased my SC P800 I was cautioned by Epson Technical Support that if I printed infrequently I should NOT purchase a Professional Epson printer as they are designed as productions machines that are used, ideally, on a daily basis but no less than twice a week. My prior printer was an Epson 4800 which had all kinds of nozzle clogging problems (I now realize was due to infrequent use). The 4900 I have heard was even worse than the 4800. There is a good article on the Luminous Landscape about the P5000: https://luminous-landscape.com/epson-in ... t-printer/
Dick Ludwig
 

by prairiewing on Sun Jan 15, 2017 1:31 pm
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 404
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
I've had 6 Epson wide format printers through the years. Currently I use a 9880 and 4800.  The 4800 no longer sheet feeds, other than that it performs well so I still use it for roll printing and a 3880 for sheets.  I make about a thousand prints a year but am sometimes gone for as long as 6 months when the printers are not used and and are not turned on.

I sometimes have clogging problems when I return after a long absence, usually resolved by 1 or 2 cleaning cycles but I also have occasional clogging problems when I'm in the middle of a 3-week print run. I would classify my clogging problems as annoying but not a big deal.  I live in a climate that is fairly dry most of the time.

I have no doubt that clogging is a big problem for some but it hasn't been for me.  Probably just sheer dumb luck since I've never taken any kind of preventative measures.  To be clear, I'm not disputing anything anyone else says and I'm not making a statement in favor of Epson printers, just reporting my experiences so to me, the new 5000 looks pretty interesting.

One additional thought:  When I do print I make quite a few prints at a time so I always do a preliminary check, cleaning if necessary  then keep it going for a day or even many days, pausing occasionally to do a nozzle check.  In that context, clogging seems minor.  But if I just fired it up say 3 times a week and had to go through that every time to make a print or 2 or 3 it would probably seem like a much bigger deal.
Pat Gerlach
 

by Mark Picard on Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:43 pm
User avatar
Mark Picard
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Location: Northern Maine
prairiewing wrote:I've had 6 Epson wide format printers through the years. Currently I use a 9880 and 4800.  The 4800 no longer sheet feeds, other than that it performs well so I still use it for roll printing and a 3880 for sheets.  I make about a thousand prints a year but am sometimes gone for as long as 6 months when the printers are not used and and are not turned on.

I sometimes have clogging problems when I return after a long absence, usually resolved by 1 or 2 cleaning cycles but I also have occasional clogging problems when I'm in the middle of a 3-week print run. I would classify my clogging problems as annoying but not a big deal.  I live in a climate that is fairly dry most of the time.

I have no doubt that clogging is a big problem for some but it hasn't been for me.  Probably just sheer dumb luck since I've never taken any kind of preventative measures.  To be clear, I'm not disputing anything anyone else says and I'm not making a statement in favor of Epson printers, just reporting my experiences so to me, the new 5000 looks pretty interesting.

One additional thought:  When I do print I make quite a few prints at a time so I always do a preliminary check, cleaning if necessary  then keep it going for a day or even many days, pausing occasionally to do a nozzle check.  In that context, clogging seems minor.  But if I just fired it up say 3 times a week and had to go through that every time to make a print or 2 or 3 it would probably seem like a much bigger deal.
Geesh - that looks like the printer I would have bought in a heartbeat had it been available a couple of months ago! I did get the P800 out of necessity and so far it's been fine. Although I will miss the roll cutting my 4880 had, as I print about 2,000 8'x12' prints, and over a hundred larger prints per year on it. I'm still using my trusty 4880 for all my roll printing on paper.  Ink consumption on the P800 seems to be also O.K., as I printed out maybe 20 boxes of 10 greeting cards in a box, and some smaller prints,  and still have a decent amount of inks left, so it may not be a heavy ink consumer that I thought it might be compared to the 4880. I in hindsight wished I had waited, but I really needed to have a sense of peace of mind if my 4880 quit, and I needed to print greeting cards too, and that I had a decent backup. Maybe my 4880 will give me a few years more of great prints!  
Mark Picard
Website:  http://www.markpicard.com
Maine Photography Workshops
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
19 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group