A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Epson 4000 vs 4800

Joe Blow , Oct 04, 2005; 10:45 a.m.

Greetings All-

10 months ago I purchased an Epson 4000 printer, used it a bit, then went off travelling for 6 months. Now that I've returned, I'm suprised to find my "new" 1800$ printer already superceded by the 4800.

Why? What caused such a fast obsolencence? Are inks etc compatible? Does Epson have some sort of trade-up policy?

While I'm willing to accept the short life-cycles of most digital photo products these days, I feel alittle like I've been ripped off by Epson.

I'm sure this has been discussed ad nauseum previously, so excuse my ignorance; I was in China without much contact with the rest of the world.

What gives?


Paul Marbs , Oct 04, 2005; 10:55 a.m.

Surely your Epson 4000 printer prints just as well as it did before your trip and before the intro of the 4800? It's just that physcological thought that something better is out there. Unless you were planning on selling it then you really haven't lost anything. You will still be able to buy inks.

Kirk Thompson , Oct 04, 2005; 11:31 a.m.

Lots of websites & reviews have explained the differences between the printers & their inksets - try some research?

The short answer is that if you consistently make glossy or luster prints, or print BW without a RIP, the 4800 will do a better job. Some dealers like Exim Vaios offer a trade-in.

If you do fine-art printing on matte papers, the 4800 doesn't offer a great improvement over your 4000.

Stefan Lubomirski de Vaux , Oct 04, 2005; 11:33 a.m.

The people who sold me my 4000 six months ago are not too impressed with the 4800. It has an extra black for Black and White and they find it difficult to see the difference. The 4000 is a fabulous printer and each day I use it I marvel at the quality. Just settle down and enjoy what you have got.

Steve Dawson , Oct 04, 2005; 11:58 a.m.

Surely the deal was that Epson made a printer with a given specification available, and you gave them a given amount of money for it? You knew what was on offer and you went for it. I don't think Epson would have made any commitment to suspend their R&D and marketing effort, and not launch any new models for the duration of your China trip. Unless Epson snuck in one of those special wireless devices which enable them to diminish a printer's performance by remote control, you have what you paid for. It's just as good as it was before.

Of course, if Epson fail to make inks and support available for the period of time you would expect for an upmarket printer you will have a legitimate grievance.

Joe Blow , Oct 04, 2005; 02:13 p.m.

Thank you for the good faith responses.

The point is, of course, that when you pay 1800$ for a printer you should expect that it not be a beta-tester and that the company who produces it have sufficiently R&Ded it so that it isnt superceded in 6 months by an "updated" model that addresses the former model's defects. Given its now a discontinued item, Epson has less reason to support it in the future, which, of course, leaves us beta-testers to suffer the consequences. I personally feel like Epson screwed me on this one, irrespective of the innate quality of the machine. Of course, the machine's specs havent changed; what I've been deprived of is my reasonable expectation of the printer's residual value, both as to its resale and its ongoing support.

If you dont understand that, I'm asuming you probably didnt lay out hard earned cash on a new 4000.

Dana Clemons , Oct 04, 2005; 04:22 p.m.

Now, if Epson would only come out with a full line of 17" roll papers to accompany it, we could really get what we want out of it. They don't tell you THAT, when they take your $1800 bucks. Dana/www.whitemountainphoto.com

Roger Moseley , Oct 04, 2005; 07:54 p.m.

I'm new to quality printing, but maybe lucky to have bought a 4800. I've been pleased with its quality on luster paper, so far. I had some Somerset photo enhanced cotton rag on hand and like the detail that can be achieved, if not the deep black. But to get to my question: I saw a note that implied Concord art paper was best for doing platinum-looking reproductions, but no hint where to go to find how to set up photoshop or the Quadtone RIP to achieve it. Where can I go to get more information/tutoring? Thanks.

Steve Dawson , Oct 04, 2005; 09:50 p.m.

You seem to be a little unclear on what your complaint is. If the problem is, as you state in the original question, that you bought an Epson printer and then six months later Epson launched a new one, then bad luck. All manufacturers periodically launch new models; there was bound to be one sooner or later.

On the other hand, if the problem is, as you say in a subsequent post, that Epson pretended yours was a finished, marketable product but actually duped you into being a 'beta tester' for an unfinished product, and later launched a new model which fixed the 'former model's defects' maybe you have a point. What are the defects of your model?

Daniel Neo , Oct 05, 2005; 04:04 a.m.

Anyone knows how long the 4000 was on the market before Epson launched the 4800? I know the 2100 was on the market a good 2.5 years before they launched the replacement 2400.

I think a 2-3 years product life on the market is not too bad for an IT product.

Enjoy your 4000.

Back to top

Notify me of Responses