R1800 v R2400..., the dilema

[brien_szabo]

I've read lots about these two printers. It seems that the R1800

outperforms the R2400 in some color aspects but lags far behind in

black and white.

 

I print 98% color with luster paper. Every once in a while I print

matte and B&W. Would I be waisting extra money on the 2400 because I

rarely do B&W's?

 

The inks are different and I've seen tests side by side on both and

the difference seems minimal to my eye. I was getting ready to

purchase the 2400 but heck, if I can get the same quality for the

kind of color work I do from the r1800, I'd rather save the $300 and

use it for extra inks and paper supply.

 

So what do the users think and because I am mainly a color guy would

the r1800 serve me just as well?

[david_simonds]

Brien, you do not mention what your current printer is. It may be that you print less in matte because your printer is not well-suited to that stock. That is why gave up on coated stock on the 2200. I have been using a 2400 for a couple weeks. It replaces a 2200 I have had for 2-3 years. I bought the 2400 in order to get into coated papers and neutral B&W printing. But my experience with the 2400 with my favorite matte papers (Velvet and UltraSmooth) is so positive that I feel less of an urge to switch out the inks. Before you pull the trigger, check out a well printed image from the 2400 on Velvet, UltraSmooth or someother art paper. If, to your eye, the output from the 1800 on coated stock is indistiguishable from the 2400, you may find that the extraordinary output of the 2400 on high end matte paper (serious archival eye candy) justifies the $300. In the life of a well-used printer, that $300 differential will work out to pennies per print.

[frank_skomial]

"I print 98% color with luster paper" - so your choice is clear: R1800.

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

I have both printers and got the 2400 for its gorgeous B&W prints on fine art papers like Velvet FA and Entrada FA. I was pleasantly suprised by its color performance. But if 99% of what you do is color, I think you'll be very happy with the 1800.

 

BTW, I was in a famous Dallas gallery yesterday and they were selling digital prints (ultrachrome) for $4000 and way up.

[brien_szabo]

I had one extra question as well - how much difference in the thickness of papers can the 1800 use compared to the 2400. I've toyed with experimenting on canvas paper - is that too thick for the 1800? the specs on the 1800 say it takes up to 11mil thickness but I'm not sure how that works is 10mil thicker than 11 or is 12 thicker than 11?

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

Higher the number the thicker the paper as far as I know.

[aaron_perelmuter]

I previously had an SP2100 and could never print on glossy papers. I purchased an R1800 about 2 months ago & have not looked back since. The performance on gloss & semi-gloss papers is nothing short of amazing for a pigment ink printer.

 

I was considering the R2400 but I've read that the extended CMYK inkset in the R2400 is better suited to proofing purposes & the CMYKRB inkset in the R1800 is geared towards digital imaging. Apparently the extremely small ink droplet size (1.5 picolitres) & the added Red & Blue inks make up for not having the light C, M & K inks. I would tend to agree with this as the gradations, skin tones, skies, etc. in my prints are fantastic.

 

And, after making a profile with an i1 Pro spectrophotometer, the output almost completely matches what my screen is showing me in the CS2 soft-proof.

 

So, if you are not looking to print much B&W or do any press proofing, the R1800 is definitely the way to go.