Medium format printer experiences?

Something to keep in mind about Epsons is usage pattern. In general an Epson printer will work the best used fairly frequently, say a couple times a week (even if it's just a webpage). This prevents the ink from drying in the printhead to form clogs. If you print too sporadically and you know it you will probably get more clogs, it's up to you whether you want to deal with them. Among other things I'll note that getting rid of the clogs is a much less fiddly process than it used to be as the R1800 has an autmatic nozzle check/cleaning cycle procedure where it uses an optical head of some sort to actually read it's own test pattern and determine if another go-around is needed.

I find that my Epson 2200 printer has much less tendency to clog with disuse than a dye-based printer. I recently cleaned the head for the first time in three years - and only after a 2 month hiatus. It works perfectly after one cleaning cycle. My 1270 would need new cartridges after two weeks of sitting idle.

For best photo quality in a B-sized printer, I recommend the R2400 over the R1800. The R1800 is optimized for producing glossy prints at the expense of gradient tones (a reduced inkset). If I want glossy prints, I use a Kodak dye-sub (model 1400) - nearly identical to Crystal C prints. Otherwise, I'm happy with the R2200 and Premium Luster or one of the matte or art papers.

Hi Matthew, One other thought if you're considering the 2400 is the just-announced Epson 3800 reviewed here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/epson-3800.shtml among other places. One interesting quote: "These cartridges (in the 3800) retail for about $55, so in fact the printer ships with nearly $500 worth of ink. This should be borne in mind by anyone considering the purchase of a 13" Epson 2400, which retails for $850, some $400 less than the 3800. In other words, the 3800 actually costs $100 less than the 2400 when the value of the provided inks is factored in. And then of course the long term lower cost of inks in the larger cartridges of the 3800 makes for greater economy as well."

The 3800 cannot accept roll-sheet paper, which for me is no big deal but may be for you. It has newer print-head technology than the 2400. That's discussed a bit here: http://www.inkjetart.com/Epson_3800_Pro/index.html FWIW, I've ordered one but have not received it yet; it's pretty badly back-ordered at most places, alledgedly because each one is "hand made". Good luck!

Like Edward, I've had no trouble with my Epson 2200 regarding any tendency to clog after the printer sat unused for several weeks, and this was not true with my 1270. It's a great printer. Having said that, however, I have a 3800 waiting to be unpacked from its box because I'd like to be able to print 16x20 (or 24), and I was influenced by the facts stated by Beau. I suspect there will be excellent used 2200 printers for sale from people like me in the coming months.

You might also look at the HP Photosmart Pro B9180. The printer is a pigment ink printer that prints 13 inches wide. It has 4 user replacable print heads that are about $45 each, in case one get clogged. You leave the printer on all the time and it automatically cleans itself to prevent clogged heads. It will automatically calibrate the heads to the factory specification - this reduces variation form printer to printer. I just purchased one and so far results are excellent.

I consider the ability to use roll paper a great asset. Mainly, it allows me to print a panoramic shot up to 44 inches long (maybe longer).

Is the reason that the R1800, R2400, etc., don't clog as often solely because of the pigment-based ink? In other words, do all EPSON dye-based ink photo printers still suffer from clogging like my EPSON 1280? Do dye-based printers from Canon and HP clog as often as the EPSONs? My 1280 clogged all the time as I only use it every few weeks and I wasted a LOT of ink cartridges constantly unclogging it.

I need to buy a new printer as my 1280 is no longer working properly, and I need to be in the same price range as Matthew. I would consider a pigment-based ink printer, but I also use will use it for general word processing, etc. Are there any disadvantages to the pigment-based inks (e.g., printing text on regular paper)?

Another item to consider before purchasing a new printer: I found that I always got the best results (color matching, longevity, etc.) by using EPSON paper with my EPSON printer. But EPSON doesn't make 2-sided glossy paper, which I need for various projects. Canon (and InkPress) make 2-sided glossy/semi-gloss paper, and I was leaning toward getting a Canon simply for this reason alone. Or, if I bought an EPSON, does anyone have any experience printing on Canon or InkPress paper with the pigment-based EPSONs?

Edward Ingold's experience is about like mine...except that I wouldn't consider the 2400. I've got a pair of 2200 and virtually no clogs with the color, running OEM pigments...like twice in several years...but I have clogs every month or two with MIS pigments in its B&W dedicated mate. The MIS pigs are definitely worth the effort in B&W, but one has to be content with occasional cleaning cycles.

These printers sit unused for weeks at a time. The color version, with the OEM pigs, has been left ON and unused for weeks at a time with no clogs at all...but I'd expect trouble with its B&W sister printer if I treated it like that, and certainly with any color ink other than Epson's.