Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/06/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Wade, probably next year there'll be a 9900 or something and all of us 3800 guys will be saying, oh I wish I had waited! I'll very likely never print bigger than 13"x19" so the A2 capability of the 3800 is no advantage at all for me. I got the 3800 over the 2400 solely due to the economics of how much ink comes with it. In Aus that's an AUD $2000 printer with AUD $900 worth of ink included. As far as the actual prints, I don't believe there is anything in it all between the 2400 and the 3800. Cheers Hoppy -----Original Message----- FSubject: Re: [Leica] Printer Purgatory Man, I wish you all would stop talking about the 3800 being better than the 2400. I purchased the 2400 about a month before the 3800 came out and it still hurts... On 6/15/07 8:09 AM, "Leonard Taupier" <len-1@comcast.net> wrote: > Mark, > > You're so right. My son did the math for me and convinced me the 3800 > was worth the extra initial cost in ink savings alone. It's a joy not > having to replace cartridges all the time like I did with the 1800. > > Len > > > On Jun 15, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote: > >> >> >> >> On 6/15/07 10:16 AM, "Leonard Taupier" <len-1@comcast.net> typed: >> >>> Peter, >>> >>> You've been getting some good advice since this post but let me add >>> my .02 >>> >>> I only use Epson printers. I have the R800, the R1800 and the Pro >>> 3800. Both the R800 and R1800 are wonderful printers for color and >>> especially for glossy prints. I bought the 3800 primarily for b&w >>> printing as this is where the other two are lacking. I cannot get a >>> true black image from either. There is always a slight purple cast to >>> the print. The gloss optimizer gives the 800 and 1800 a clear edge >>> over the 3800 for glossy color prints. I have never had an ink clog >>> with any of the printers. The 3800 and it's little brother the 2400 >>> were optimized for the best possible b&w prints. There is no color >>> cast. Since you don't need the larger printer I would get the 2400 >>> and not play around with the R200 or R300 which may not do the job >>> for you. >>> >>> Oh. I also only use Epson ink. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Len >>> >>> >> >> >> Just a note brought out in a shutterbug article on the 3800. >> >> When you buy a 3800 you are getting in effect 500 dollars with of >> pigment >> ink. >> >> Subtract that from the cost of the printer it is cheaper than the >> 2400. >> >> This and the more modern print engine and the fact that its not >> that big >> even if you mainly did letter sized prints the 3800 would still be >> maybe >> your best bet. I'd say for sure the one to get. >> >> I don't think Peter, as I know him, would want a printer with gloss >> optimizer designed for glossy color non pigment prints but just the >> opposite. >> >> Matt pigment black and whites. >> >> It used to be Epson had a letter sized version of their pigment >> printers. >> For some reason that's not the case any more. >> >> But the 2400's not worth it compared to the 3800. A printer you can >> really >> fly with. Sets you free. >> >> Rock and Roll >> >> Mark Rabiner >> Harlem, NY >> >> markrabiner.com >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w a d e h e n i n g e r u s e r e x p e r i e n c e a d o b e s y s t e m s , i n c _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information