Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 28, 2005, 4:38 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I have seen many reviews on the r800 and agree, it does look like a great printer. Plus epson has so many different paper options. Really the only thing holding me back from getting one is all the talk about clogged printheads and ink waste in the internal sponge. Any of you r800 users have or have had any of these problems?

And WOW!!! Thanks for all the replys.
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 2005, 6:10 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Caboose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 625
Default

I haven't had my R800 very long, but so far no problems with clogging. I have an idea that most of the clogging problems are from using inks other than epsons. I also have a Epson all in one CX5400 and have had it for quite a while and never had any problems with it either. On the other hand my mother had an epson the did clog up on her, but she was trying some after market inks that claimed to be the same formula as epsons but she never got one print out of it after she loaded those inks, clogged it right up.
Caboose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 2005, 7:11 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I am very much considering the Epson R800. Can you tell me how your prints do as far as drying? Thats my main beef with the HP 8450. Some prints dry in a week or so but some stay tacky for a month or more. I need a printer that prints cotrasty and sharp but also drys in a day or two or less. How long is it before you can put your fotos behind glass or plastic sheets in foto albums? And how long is it before you can actually hand hold your fotos without smudging them. I have prints from my HP over 3 to 5 months old that I can take outside my home and the inks still smudges. Thats one of the things I am trying to avoid.

Thanks for your reply.
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 29, 2005, 2:26 AM   #14
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Dry for gentle handling after a few minutes, normal after an hour or two. They recommend 24 hours for behind glass.

Never been a problem for me.

I assume you know all about colour profiles and suchlike. I didn't and it took me a couple of weeks to get it all sorted out so that my prints were what I wanted but now I generally get much better results than printing at a lab.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 29, 2005, 5:35 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

Thanks peripatetic. The HP8450 creates prints twice as good as a photo lab, or at least the ones I have went two. But the cost of ink, the waste of ink after one is used up in the 3 color cartraige, and this drying problem has made me retire the HP for color printing and only use it for B/W. I talked to a manager at BestBuy,a retail electronics store,and he told me that reps from Canon and Epson were going to be there this weekend so I am going there to drill them both over there printers. Surely since both are going be there they will have no problem letting me print off a bunch of samples to compare all the printers. Hopefully I can get a good battle going and mabey recieve a discount of some sort on the printer I decide on.
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 29, 2005, 9:06 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 188
Default

IMHO, Generally Photo printers are a waste of money and time.* As you are begining to realize the printer could be free and you could be poor quiickly in $$ consumables, wasted time etc.Most are much better of uploading to one of the many fine online photo services snapfish, shutterfly, photoworks etc. etc.* *The cost is low the delivery quick.* *Even if photo printers were cheaper per page it would take a while to cover the cost of most printers.I personally think Color printers for photos, for most consumes is just about the biggest con out there.
anthlover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 30, 2005, 6:56 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

For some people, your right. Photo printers are a waste of money. But thats only for those weekend shooters who print 4x6s in majority. A little crop here, a little saturation there and whala! They are happy. But for those who want the foto to be just right and do light to moderate photo reconstruction want complete controll over the final image. Most consumer printers are aimed at weekend photographers. With there stand alone printing, card readers and preview screens. I do not want any of that on my printer. I want a printer and that is it. I want control over all colors and if I want an 8x10 or so on, then I can print it. If I want a pano, then so be it. If I do not like my print I can adjust it and try again. The complete control is worth every cent to me.

Some people create pictures

Some people create works of art
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 31, 2005, 2:13 PM   #18
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

anthlover wrote:
Quote:
IMHO, Generally Photo printers are a waste of money and time. As you are begining to realize the printer could be free and you could be poor quiickly in $$ consumables, wasted time etc.Most are much better of uploading to one of the many fine online photo services snapfish, shutterfly, photoworks etc. etc. The cost is low the delivery quick. Even if photo printers were cheaper per page it would take a while to cover the cost of most printers.I personally think Color printers for photos, for most consumes is just about the biggest con out there.
Well - I went and splashed out on some "professional" printing at a nearby lab for an A3 print I wanted to enter in a competition.

It cost me £14.95. It was unusably bad - shockingly poor - incredibly awful, I had stupidly assumed I'd get a good print, so I missed the deadline and will have to enter the photo next year.

The R800 only does A4 - which is why I needed the lab, but crops of the same A3 file came out fine, so it's not the PS file that's the problem - it's poor quality "professional" printing.

And as for the high-street minilabs, I don't think I've ever got results from them which are even close to what I can print on my R800, and since I've had it I've printed lots more good photos and I don't have to pay for the ones I don't want.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 31, 2005, 6:07 PM   #19
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

i have had way too many photomats screw up the profiling on my photos to ever use them again..

the only one that i have heard that has consistantly decent profiling is MPix.Com.. and i only know this information 2nd hand...
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:41 PM.