rokkor fan Posted July 18, 2003 Share Posted July 18, 2003 Hi all, I am considering purchasing a colour inkjet printer, and I have effectively narrowed my search down to the 2100/2200 vs. the 1280/1290 (although any other suggestions are welcomed). I searched the archives and didn't find a similar thread, which I thought was strange as I imagine this is a common dilemma. My basic requirements are as follows: I will print mainly A3. I may wish to print longer prints (panoramics) My prints will be both B & W and Color. I am not concerned about archival quality. I will not print huge volumes. Any recommendations will be warmly received. Best regards, Antony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_cooper Posted July 18, 2003 Share Posted July 18, 2003 I use both the 1280 and 2200. If you're not concerned with archival quality I feel the 1280 is the better choice. A little slower than the 2200 but equal in output quality (except for glossy where it far exceeds the 2200). You also can set up a continuous flow ink system for much less $$ with the 1280 if you decide to go that route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_bingham Posted July 18, 2003 Share Posted July 18, 2003 The 2200 uses pigment ink with archival qualities of 70-100 years. The 1280 uses dye ink with archival qualities of 25 years with Colorlife paper. The 1280 has a higher dmax than the 2200 thereby producing snappier blacks and more saturated colors. More like a tradional Cibachrome print. If you are not concerned about archival qualities the 1280 would be a better choice for your needs. The elves decide what goes in the archives. Sometimes perfectly good information gets dumped. And yes, this question has been asked many times before. Steve Bingham www.dustylens.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoyo_szeto Posted July 18, 2003 Share Posted July 18, 2003 The main advantage of 2100 is using pigments instead od dyes. Pigments have vety good light fastness when compared with dyes. Also, the printing of B/W is much solid. By the way, neutral color can be achieved with the Graybalancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter nelson Posted July 18, 2003 Share Posted July 18, 2003 <I>The main advantage of 2100 is using pigments instead od dyes. Pigments have vety good light fastness when compared with dyes. Also, the printing of B/W is much solid. By the way, neutral color can be achieved with the Graybalancer.</I><P> This is only partially correct. The Gray Balancer does not correct for metamerism, which is the 2100/2200's biggest problem with black and white printing. As a result the Gray Balancer only lets you get a neutral black and white print under <B>a specific light source</B>. The metamerism on the 2100/2200 is so bad that you can even see it on the SAMPLE PRINT Epson supplies with the printer to demonstrate its black and white printing capability. People who are serious about black and white printing on the 2100/2200 use a RIP. (there are also septone inks coming out for it)<P> The other problem with the 2100/2200 is that it <B>sucks</B> on glossy paper.<P> The strengths of the 22100/2200 are that the inks are archival and you can print on thicker media.<P> For your purposes I suggest the 1280/1290. It will meet your stated needs and cost a lot less both when you purchase it and in ink costs later. Something to keep in mind is that getting neutral black and white prints on <B>ANY</B> inkjet printer is very difficult. Even with the 1280/1290 you can't escape the need for a profiler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_demott Posted July 18, 2003 Share Posted July 18, 2003 I have both the 2200 and the 1270 (predecessor to the 1280, and very similar in performance to the 1280). I find that I use the 2200 for most of my printing even when I don't care about archival qualities. The reason is simple--I prefer to print on matte and watercolor paper and I think the 2200 produces a better quality product than the 1270 on those papers. I find the colors from the 2200 to be richer and more radiant, as well as being extremely accurate. The matte black ink on the 2200 gives it plenty of punch on those papers. If you want to print primarily on glossy papers, then the 1280 is clearly the better choice. The 2200 produces a bronzing effect that is visible at certain viewing angles on glossy papers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gooseberry Posted August 15, 2003 Share Posted August 15, 2003 Does the following matter?<br>Stylus 1280/1290 = 2880 x 720<br>Stylus 2100/2200 = 2880 x 1440<br>Canon i9100 = 4800 x 1200<p>If you compare Canon i9100 with Epson Stylus Photo 1280/1290, you almost double the dot-count per inch in both dimensions. I have no first-hand experience, but I would have thought that the difference should be substantial and apparent ...unless it's only a marketing thing and in reality it doesn't really matter -- what's the deal?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now