Google| Subject | Re: converting raw images from Canon EOS 600D |
| From | Floyd L. Davidson |
| Date | 12/01/2013 09:10 (11/30/2013 23:10) |
| Message-ID | <87mwklj8kl.fld@apaflo.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | PeterN |
| Followups | PeterN (11h & 7m) |
PeterN <peter.newnospam@verizon.net>wrote:
PeterNI think you talked to a really good salesman... who was able to determine that you didn't like the idea of the bigger printers and were suseptable to exactly what he said. Sharp guy, and probably does very well in sales.
An Epson salesman told me that since I print about ten prints a month, and do not do large format printing, it would be silly for me to get anything larger than the 3880.
The 4880 and 4900 don't make larger prints than the 3880, so the "large format printing" hasn't a lot to do with it. The ten prints a month does though, as that is not really enough ink usage to be an economic advantage.
The 3880 is less hassle with clogging than any other wide format Epson.
But, it doesn't do roll paper, doesn't use vacuum assisted paper transport, and just isn't the rock solid piece of machinery the other 17" printers are.
So frankly it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. For overall less hassle, the 3880 probably is a better choice for you! But it is also true that ten prints a month is enough to keep a 4880 from ever clogging up, and it is just so much nicer to use. But it also costs an arm and a leg to switch MK to PK inks, and the paper cutter isn't sturdy enough for canvas. So the even more expensive 4900 is really the only other option.
-- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com
11/30/2013-
-
