Jump to content

Original vs. re-manufactured cartidges for Epson R2400


Recommended Posts

<p>Any consensus on using original Epson cartridges vs. re-manufactured cartridges? I used re-manufactured from LD until my Canon 9900 got fatally clogged. So far only original inks for the R2400, but it is highway robbery, so before potentially causing trouble I need some thoughts.<br>

Thanks</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>How much do you value your work? I only use genuine Epson K3 inks in my 2400. For me, it is not worth the risk to experiment with other inks, esp. because I have no way of knowing what impact these cheap inks will have on my prints 10 years from today. I used to do a lot of wet darkroom color printing - and believe me, compared to that, the R2400 output is cheap:-)</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Third party inks? You are asking for trouble, and it would be YOUR trouble alone having voided the Epson warranty. An 8x10 photo-quality print will use about $1.50 in ink in an R2400, and about half that in a 3800 or larger printer (larger ink cartridges). That seems pretty reasonable to me.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>My experience with the Canon 9900 using 3rd party inks ( LD Products ) was that the colors were fine, but the printer suffered a fatal head clog. It is hard to determine if this was caused by the inks or if the printer was prone to do this anyway. Numerous comments about the 9900 seemed to indicate clogged heads were a printer problem. The intended output for my Epson is Christmas cards and calendars, so archival quality is not a concern. I just want to be sure I don't shoot myself in the foot. There is a paucity of information on 3rd party inks and the Epson.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Consumer Reports found that many 3rd party cartridges actually had less ink in them than the manufacturer's cartridges. When they counted how many prints could be made, the 3rd party cartridges turned out to be more expensive than the manufacturer's cartridges per print. Yes, the prices were low but the amount of ink was even lower. Combined that with the generally lower quality of the ink and the possibility of damage to the printer, it not a good idea to use 3rd party inks. So unless you have an actual test report from a reputable source such as Consumer Reports or Wilhelm Research I would stay away from any 3rd party cartridge.</p>

<p>Danny</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I'll be a little contrarian. The best things about my 2400 were a) minimal clogging despite intermittent use and b) ABW. If you use third party inks I think it's likely that you are going to lose the precision of ABW. If you use third party inks you are going to have more clogging problems. But if you print all in color and don't let the machine sit, you may want to chance it. But if that's the case you may have volume to justify a 3800 or a 4880, with much cheaper costs for OEM ink.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>One poster came up with another way:<br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00G3JW">http://www.photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00G3JW</a><br>

" You can roughly halve the ink costs of a 2200 or R2400, and still use the same Epson ink by buying the 110 ml cartridge for the 4000 (for 2200) or 4800 (for R2400). They cost less than $50 in the US. Buying the 220 ml carts works out even cheaper (they are about $80 each). Use a CIS or spongeless refillable cartridges."<br>

But I can't find a tutorial on how to go about it.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>In the long run you're far better off financially with a 3800 or subsequent. Big tanks. They come with about $500 in ink included (80% of which is usable from the first set due to system-charging, closer to 100% subsequently). Get a refurb directly from Epson, save big money.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>John Kelly Yours is the kind of response that makes these forums so valuable. I had long suspected what you wrote to be true, but it is apparent you have done the math (thus saving me the calculations and effort. I will be guided by your work.<br>

A man named King Gillette had a brilliant idea: Either give away or sell razors which use disposable blades at such small cost that use patented blades that no one else would dare get into the business, then sell the blades at outlandishly high prices. His brand still absolutely dominates the razor blade market worldwide, though there is really no reason razor blades should cost as much as they do (they have to lock them now behind cashiers because they're 'so valuable' (meaning high priced) even though they don't consist of all that much really in raw materials or for that matter can they cost that much to manufacture.<br>

Epson currently is running discount 'deals' on its smaller printer(s), and surely they don't see much or any profit on the machines themselves, but Seiko/Epson is not foolish; if they sell a machine, the ink sells for as much or more than gold per ounce (no, I haven't actually done the calculations, but it's damned expensive and if someone else made as good ink they'd be in clover . . . . even if they could sell it for half the price if they double their costs.<br>

Printers, I understand, won't really 'deal' on giclee prints made with Epson printers because of high ink costs, whereas they will on lightjet and traditional printing because costs there are more 'flexible' -- there's something to be said for the traditional darkroom, if one doesn't mind the smell of chemistry and ensuring water flows at precise temperatures, etc.<br>

As soon as anybody comes nearly as good as Epson is today, (Canon? Hewlett Packard? it's certain Epson will announce new 'progress' and 'achievements' that set their 'ink' and 'prints made with them' apart'.<br>

It's a great game, if you control the field.<br>

When I buy a laser printer for ordinary use, I wait for a sale, buy one at less than $50 (which happens periodically, it has a less than fully loaded cartridge, but it is worth alone more than the price of the printer.<br>

When the cartridge is about to run out, I sell the printer or if it runs out and I cannot sell it, I just recycle it rather than buy a cartridge (not having a refill service nearby.) And the prints from a Brother $50 printer (normally $120) are very, very good -- better than Xerox produced for the first 20 or 30 years, and much much faster on warmup and in prints per minute.<br>

With the larger Epson the real question is finding the place to put one; as I'm sold on the larger size, John, based on your research. <br>

John (Crosley)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...