Compras Nikon Bluetooth |
 |
| The versatile 2200 makes it easy to print on envelopes, roll paper, and many types and sizes of single-sheet paper. |
The 2200 supports a wide variety of paper types, including glossy, semi-glossy, luster, matte, and Epson's velvet fine art paper, as well as large-format sizes up to 13 by 44 inches. With the included roll paper holder and built-in automatic cutter, you can print borderless images easily, while a photo catcher neatly stacks multiple prints as they are cut.
Compatible with both Mac and PC systems, the 2200 comes backed with a one-year Epson exchange warranty.
What's in the Box
Printer, AC power supply and cord, seven ink cartridges (cyan, light cyan, magenta, light magenta, yellow, light black, photo black), roll paper holder accessory, roll paper cutter and catcher; printer cable not included
Let me begin by saying that I have over ten years of experience with all things computer related. During that period I have worked in almost every aspect of computer support. I have personally cleaned out countless numbers of inkjet printers with q-tips distilled water and alcohol. I kept my own Epson 740 going for 5 years without too much difficulty. I only got rid of it because I had a client that was desperate for a printer that would accept a Mac serial port. Boy due I miss that Epson 740.
I bought a C82 a little less than a year ago, after reading good reviews. I assumed it would be built at least as well as the Epson 740 I was using before.
Even after ten months my C82 still appears in almost brand new shape inside and out. Heck, I've only used it about thirty times or so. I keep it inside of cabinet shielded from dust. Plus as a matter of standard practice, I turn off all inkjet printers as soon as I finish using them, and I always change ink cartridges as quickly as possible to prevent ink from drying out inside printers.
So was I ever surprised when my printer stopped working. It had worked fine with the first set of cartridges I had installed. However, as soon as I changed cartridges the printer stopped working. I tried cleaning it at least fifty times, but it did nothing to improve the situation. So I did the natural thing and googled my problem. I was shocked by the sheer number of search results.
After reading through the reviews at Amazon and the hundreds of messages at fixyourownprinter.com I've come to realize that Epson has built and continue to build a printer that is so poorly designed one must question their integrity as a company. To think that so many people would experience the same problem and that their only solution is to continue to send people refurbished printers until their warranty expires.
Oh, and the part that will really get you, is that they require you to purchase and install a new set of four Epson branded ink cartridges to insure that your currently installed cartridges are not what is defective. So before you can even have your printer replaced you must invest at least sixty dollars on ink. Of course they offer to send you new ink with the replacement printer. Still to ask me to sink my time, energy, and sixty dollars into having my printer replaced with another one, which will simply get me right back to where I began. I mean really, the nerve. Is this what our present day world has come to? Have we set ourselves up so that these large corporations can totally take advantage of us in this way? Is there no recourse? Are there no standards of business ethics that they can be held accountable for?
The experience has left me feeling unusually sad. Epson has made me realize just how much I am at the mercy of these large corporations. I mean, if you want to print, who else can you buy a printer from?
I know that even if Epson would own up to this, they would argue that they had to make the printers so cheaply to remain competitive. Without doing so they would go out of business tomorrow. We've heard all that before. Haven't we?
Still though, this printer is made by someone in a Chinese factory. I know I'm going out on a limb here, but I would guess that that person is not well paid. Perhaps they are even exploited to some extent or at the very least we could guess that they are taken advantage of to some extent. Then as they role off the Chinese production line, Epson sends these defective printers all over the globe, wrapped up in fancy magazine advertisements. People like me buy the printer, use the ink, put in new ink, discover it no longer works, call Epson, ship the printer back to Epson, get the refurbished printer in the mail, and Don't think me a luddite either. I love computers, printers, and gadgets as much as the next person. It's just that it disgusts me that I am forced to deal with a corporation that is not held to any kind of moral or ethical principles. As long as they are making money and growing we think of them as a good thing, without worrying about who they are taking advantage of. What are we doing here? How can we let Epson get away with this? Really! Well it's not difficult for me to say I will be boycotting all Epson products in the future. I mean I'm sort of doubtful of their quality anyways. Oh and I haven't even mentioned the very unhelpful tech support and customer service representatives that I called long distance at my own expense. What a waste! Really what a waste! Sincerely, - Mark Whitney - P.S. I know the solution is to buy myself a do-it-yourself printer cleaning kit. If you google it you'll see that many companies sell them specifically for the Epson C80/C82. However, if you try to buy one you'll soon discover that they are all sold out, as I mentioned before I'm not the only one with this problem.
is WOW!!!! This is probably the best purchase I have ever made. This thing is everything I ever expected and more!! It's very easy to use as well! I have bought other brands before, and this one just blows everything else out of the water! I have to say, everyone out there who is thinking of buying this, stop thinking. I bought it and I am extremely happy with it the moment I powered this thing on. YOU ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY CANNOT GO WRONG WITH THIS PURCHASE! I GUARANTEE IT!!!
Cons: The only problem I encountered was trying to connect it via USB with an external hub. It wouldn't work. It seems very sensitive to cable length as well, as I was not able to use a long (10ft) cable with it. If you have problems where the printer seems to lock up while printing, take a look at the USB connection. I can't wait to do some real B&W printing with this machine.
Unless you print psychedelic computer art, avoid the premium glossy as there's a lot of "bronzing" - the gloss black ink dries flat and stands out at angles compared to the glossy color inks. While this looks nice in some instances (computer art and especially fireworks photography), it detracts in others. Premium luster, premium semigloss, and matte do not exhibit this problem at all and yield SPECTACULAR prints that'll last as long as real photo-developed prints and dyesub printouts, if not longer (according to Epson's and 3rd party tests, using Epson paper and Epson inks - don't use generic ink because it's not the same and it'd likely ruin the printer too.) What else can be said? It's slow, but given the depth and detailed resolution, it's not going to be fast. It's well worth the wait.
The 2200 is easy to load; easy instructions, easy set up. Easy to use. The PPDs work well with IPhoto and the Epson photo program that it comes with. Printing through Photoshop proved to be disappointing, even with the PPD. Do what you need to in PS, save and import into Epson's program or IPhoto before printing (based on OSX trials through my G4). Will need to buy a cable. Suggest getting extra ink cartridges and paper up front -- you'll want to play once you have it in your hands.
On Matte paper this printer is INCREDIBLE. The prints are amazing and will last forever (supposedly). On glossy and semi-gloss paper it's not as good, with lots of blacks it sucks. I print lots of outdoor photography. For daytime I use the 2200 on Epson Pro Matte paper. I also do some long exposure night shots. For those I use my 1270 (1280) with Epson Pro Semi-Gloss paper. So, the upside, beware. This is not a general printer for all. If you want the best general printer, get a 1280 for half the price. But if you want THE best matte prints that last forever, get this printer. PS - Can print direct on CD's too, but is a bit of a pain.
I guess I am too unsophisticated to understand "archival quality" is another way of saying poor visual quality. I could care less if it lasts a lifetime if it isn't what I want. Using Matte paper reduces the effect somewhat but again, nowhere in the advertisements or instructions do you find this, nope you have to get ahold of Tech Support to find out that what you get isn't really what you wanted even though all the ads say it is. Maybe Epson could consider a choice of inks for this machine. Save your money folks, stick with Canon or HP.
There are other annoyances...like having to switch black ink cartridges when switching paper types from matte to glossy. Also, this printer cannot print borderless matte photos! Once the matte black cartridge is inserted, the software won't allow borderless. Using the glossy black will really sacrifice image quality. This is definitely the best printer you can get.
I've become a big fan of the Matte finish paper and now use it for 80% or my prints. The large format print capability was my primary reason for purchasing this printer. I've printed quite a few 10"x13" photos and am very impressed with the results. I personally prefer printing my own stuff since photo labs often do not change their chemicals as frequently as required. I'd buy this printer again and would recommend it to anyone who wants to prints that are larger than 8x10. It's expensive but worth the money.
I use it with digital files from a 5 megapixel camera edited in Photoshop Elements on an LCD monitor calibrated with PhotoCal, and have been delighted with the results. The color rendition is accurate and the detail is comparable to a commercial print. The 2200 stands apart from it's nearest competitor, the Canon i9100, because the inks promise to deliver very long life, comparable to a commercial print. But.. it's also slower than the Canon, and more expensive. For amateurs, I suppose the 2200 is overkill with its 13 x 19 inch capability. After all, how often will we make prints larger than 8 x 10? Will we be around in 75 years to verify that the prints haven't faded? Wouldn't it be less expensive to bring the files for those prints to a photo processor? Sure it would, but how much fun is that?
Please, please don't waste your money on this. I am sure it works fine with Windows, but doesn't Epson understand that a lot of the digital imaging people out there are Mac users!?!? I am currently awating a call back from an "escalator" - a person who deals with people like me that won't accept that I have to buy a new PC to use this. If it says OS 10.2.5 compatible on the box, I am not letting them off the hook till it works. Oh, by the way, the tech support number they give you is fully automated and you can't talk to a "real" person, no matter what numbers you hit. I had to call a bunch of different departments, but the number to talk to a live tech support person is 562-276-7296 (in California). Maybe I can save someone a few frustrating phone calls. That will get you a live person, not that they even help. I'm sorry HP - I am coming back!!! I learned my lesson!!!!
For starters, I first noticed that exterior of this printer was rather flimsy and some parts are quite breakable. The printer tray in the front simply folds down, however when folding up, it only "clicks" on the left side. On one of my pritners, the tray falls at the slightest bump. Additionally, the extendable paper tray is a bit cheap and can be a little cumbersome to extend. Also, the cover is easily scratched; even wiping it with a paper towel can cause abrasions in the opaque black cover. With use, over time it will loose it's cosmetic appearance quite quickly. I have always thought Epson printers were of lower contruction standards when compared to HP. As a very experienced user (with proper monitor balancing tools and tons of "profile" experience) I was not able to get color results that I was happy with, mainly in regards to magenta levels. I was forced to tweak the magenta settings down by -2 for every print, regardless of which profile I used. Furthermore, when compared to traditional photographic images, I have had difficulty with a push/pull between magenta and green. While on one hand a portion of any given image appeared too magenta, another portion of the same image was obviously too green, particularly anyone with blonde hair. Obviouslly, there is no way to do an overall color correction for this. Every print I have printed has this issue, and I have used two different printers. Overall, the prints just did not look right to me. When comparing the Epson 2200 prints to a PROFESSIONALLY operated Fuji Frontier system, after the Epson prints are completely dry they seemed to have a "fog" to them, almost like looking through a pane of thin non-glare glass. The most notable disappointment with these prints is any areas that either are white or black, or fade to white or black. The slightest angle in the light reveals a myriad of reflection patterns, which I find completely unacceptable. These reflections are highly noticeable when the prints are viewed on a wall from any angle. They can be quite ugly and destroy the image, especially images with high contrast. More recently, I took an image that I was mostly happy with and professionally framed it. We used conservation quality mats and conservation glass, which blocks 98% of the UV rays. Within two weeks, I noticed something curious and have yet to take the frame apart to investigate further. When viewing through the glass at an angle, the parts of the image that are the darkest seem to be transferring to the glass. The image is 1/8 inch away from touching the glass. While this has created an interesting pattern on the glass, obviously this is not desired and leads me to question the "archival" claims made by Epson. Since we are in a dry climate, it is not humidity; and since we are in a rural area, it is not an effect of ozone or pollution, both of which environmental conditions are mentioned in the paper packaging regarding proper print storage and display. The only thing I can figure is that static electricity is somehow pulling a very thin layer of the darker inks off the print towards the glass. We'll see. ...... I simply cannot recommend this printer to anyone who is greatly concerned with accurate color. I have tried two different printers, and getting accurate color has been a big hassle. Don't get me wrong, the average consumer will be happy I'm sure, but anyone who desires accuracy will not be pleased, especially if they are a professional. I impolore any professional user to be just as critical of this printer, as any print they would receive from a lab; there is quite a big difference. Again, for an ink-jet "photo" printer, the Epson 2200 is a huge leap forward and at first glance it is quite impressive; but after closer inspection, to say the printer is of true "photographic quality" simply is not true. I'll stick to creating my own work, while leaving the printing to the professionals down the street. At least I know for a fact that my prints will still be around for the rest of my life, and beyond; and who needs the push/pull between green and magenta! In the long run, getting accurate color is cheaper when going to the lab, rather than wasting two or more attempts on the printer.
Ink cartridges have chips on them so they can't be refilled. When they say they're empty, you can't use them anymore, even though there's an awful lot of ink left inside them at that point. When one nozzle clogs, you have to clean all the nozzles, wasting ink. BUT, if any of the ink cartridges are low (not out, LOW) it won't let you clean the nozzles unless you change that low cartridge. There may be enough ink in there for 10 more prints but you can't run the cleaning routine until you change it out for a full one! If you choose to just keep printing to use up the rest of the expensive ink, you'll get streaks from the clogged nozzle. You're stuck wasting several grams of the precious ink either way. And the nozzles clog at least every seven or eight pages or so, or if you leave the printer on overnight, or if you use any ink other than the expensive Epson ink, or if you look at it funny. Look up the price of the ink cartridges before you buy this thing, and be sure you're prepared to replace at least a few of them during every print session. If money's no object, it's a lovely printer.
So you are asking yourself, what is my "PROBLEM" with Winows XP? If you have tried to install this printer in XP you already know what I'm talking about. If you are about to, please read on, I have good news for you. There is a solution to the "System Lock Up" problem after installing the Epson Printer Driver supplied with this unit. THE FIX: Install the driver as instructed in the installation booklet that comes with the printer. When the installation is complete, DO NOT reboot your system. Instead first go to the "Start" button at the bottom left corner of your screen, go to the applications folder and then to the EPSON folder. There you will find a utility that deletes the printer ports that EPSON's driver has installed. Run this utility, follow the prompts, when it is complete you may then reboot your system. When WINDOWS XP has restarted all will be well. This works for the Printer Parallel connector as well as Firewire. Yes even Firewire!! Have fun with your Epson Stylus Photo 2200 Inkjet Printer. I know I am.
I recommend Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper (Luster E, 10 mil). However, I can only find this paper at speciality camera shops and through the web. The average store doesn't carry the Epson paper you need - as not even all Epson papers work on this printer! Despite the compatibility concern - the prints are extreme. I'm using a Nikon CoolScan to scan my slides - and my Epson 2200 to print off every last detail.
I stick with Epson's paper designed for this printer and the color accuracy has been great (I'm using a calibrated monitor and Epson's color profiles and get great results 95% of the time). It is the first printer where the characteristics of reflective color from the paper so closely match the projected color of the screen (which is quite an accomplishment). With the Matte Black ink, printing on the Watercolor paper, the inks are so rich it look like velvet. For me, it was the missing link in the digital workflow. From digital camera to computer to paper, I have full control and predictability of what my output is going to look like without any rude surprises at the end-saving me time and money. And it will last longer than a traditional print! But like all things, do your homework with Photoshop to understand what you need to do to assure wide gamut, accurate prints. A few surprises: I have yet to see the need for printing at 2880dpi - 1440dpi has done just fine (saving you ink and time). Also, I was suprised to find that for large prints that start out as small digital photos, I didn't need to upsample them in Photoshop to the recommended 300-360dpi. I was able to output a photo at 1440dpi, 12"X44" that only had 118dpi in the file and the results were amazing. No pixelation or jaggies. Epson's print driver does as good a job at interpolation as Photoshop would do and I was able to work with a 20Meg file rather than a 200Meg file! I would strongly recommend this printer to anyone serious about their photography. Of course the 'garbage in-garbage out' rule applies. Do your homework in Photoshop, understand the rules of color and color matching, and this printer won't disappoint you. Keep in mind, all my work is done on a Mac which has excellent color control so I can't speak for PC users.
ITS NOT THE COMPUTER!
Well my recommendation for you is to definitely stick to the Epson 2200. My experience with the Canon was not good. The Canon product seems to be developing a growing reputation for poor print life resulting from color shifts and bleaching of the pigments. I speak from experience for I used a printer with their BCI-6 inks and it was a disaster with prints on their paper only lasting a few weeks! From the word I got at Photokina this year, Canon is going to have printers with pigmented inks released next year (so hold your breath on that one). So I sold my Canon and now have used the Epson 2200 for about a month and I really am impressed. Get the paper ICC profiles (download Epson Aust) and you are in business with stunning prints! Rich blacks too...wow! These profiles btw are pretty dam good. I made some with Monaco ICC profile builder and they were not necessary. They did however benefit the Nikon Coolscan 4000 but that is another story. Ok any negatives. Yes, Epson US does not issue the 2200 with the gray balancer software (so for improved monochrome print matching you may download this software from Epson elsewhere and pretend you have a Epson 2100), also if you are buying this remember a cable (IEEE-1394 is fastest). In terms of output speed, it is not as fast a Canon, but there it is more flexibility in my opinion with roll paper and paper cutters. The Epson media is also generally a bit cheaper than that of Canon so that is a bonus. So in conclusion, the extra $$ outlaid for the Epson will be recovered in print longevity. I would say do your self a favor and indulge.
Windows XP driver default installation caused my machine to reboot spontaneously. I thought my computer was broken! The driver needs to be partially uninstalled to work, but then it works fine. Couldn't find ICM color profiles after installing the software, but you can get them from Epson UK or Australia web sites. Couldn't find a color profile for the ColorLife paper.
After testing the EPSON 2200 for a week with 4 different papers and numerous driver settings I am not able to achieve what I consider an acceptible glossy print. The prints have a sickly sheen in the white areas when viewed even at a slight angle. They lack the "punch" saturation and sharpness of my old 1200. YEs, the printer is nice looking, very quiet and smooth compared to my old work-horse. Yes, I like the idea of water-resistant, fade proof prints that will last 25 years, but to paraphrase Shakespeare, "the photo's the thing" I'm going to give it one more try with Epson Professional Glossy Paper, which is hard to find, sold only in Super A3 in the U.S. and expensive. If that doesnt work, it's back to Amazon, and I'll probably upgrade my 1200 to a 1280 dye based printer.
I purchased the printer as a companion for my Nikon D100 digital SLR camera. The two features that were critical in my decision to go with this over other cameras on the market are the ability to print up to 2880x1440dpi and the max paper size of 13x19inches. When the printer first arrived, I was a bit skeptical and dissappointed to find that the OSX support is quite basic. Now, it is important to note that all features are supported in Classic mode, but as many can understand, this is a bit of a hassle. That said, I have found in my experience so far that there isn't anything that I would like to do that I can't with OSX. Boarderless printing might be a concern to others, so I will point out that you cannot print Boarderless in OSX. That said, as a semi-professional photographer, I don't care for boarderless prints at all. You often loose some of the image because the size of the actual image seldom matches the size of the paper and cropping almost always happens. The paper-roll is another option that is not available through OSX, but quite frankly, I have very little use for it. Despite these slight bad points, I was able to everything that I would ever want to do right out of the box. It took me a few test strips to get the first truly impressive print and from that moment on I've been getting fantastic picture one after another. I've tested a number of types of paper in a number of settings and have found the following: Colorsync (the setting in OSX that is supposed to match the image on the screen in terms of accuracy) was not really desireable. Colors were weak, blacks were not on target, overall lackluster. I found that photorealistic created fantastic output at 2880-1440dpi. Also, it is VERY important to note that the quality of prints jumps DRAMATICALLY between regular matte photopaper and actual glossy or semi-glossy photopaper. A word to film photographers: terminology in digital, injet printing paper is slightly different from regular photographic media. What we know as "matte" paper is a lot more like regular printer paper. I would recommend Semi-glossy, or Pearl if you want heafty paper, but not "shiny." I have tested the Epson brand of semi-glossy and it is very nice. The only problem is that it is on the whole more expensive that third party paper. I've done some research and testing and found that Ilford inkjet printing paper is fantastic with used on the 2200. Ilford recommends that you set your printer to Premium Glossy, but I tried both Premium Glossy and Semi-glossy and got equal results as far as I could see with the naked eye. I have also experimented with 13x19 prints and they are fantastic and gigantic. Printing times using a 600mhz iBook, 650mb ram, and firewire at max resolution are about 5 minutes for 8x10 and about 15 minutes for 13x19. Given the quality and the fact that the output looks as good as anything I've ever gotten from a professional developer, it is fine worth the wait. For the record, I am printing Tiffs recorded at the highest resolution that the D100 will handle. Each print is about 17.4MB in size. It may be that with prints of smaller file-size the printing times are reduced, but for archival purposes, I max out the file-sizes of my digital photography and I find it to be equal to that of film (at least as far as I've compared to my old film-based prints) One last minor problem is the ink. The cartriges (seven total) are small and after printing about 15 prints, all at max resolution, I find that some of the colors (the light colors in particular) are about 1/4 of the way used. This leads me to two thoughts: 1. do not print max resolution until you are doing your final prints. 2. They could have made the cartriges bigger in order to make it a bit more cost effective. That said, this is perhaps the best printer for digital photography that I have ever seen and I am more than willing to give it 5 stars despite some minor problems here and there. N.
I am a complete novice to the digital darkroom, but the B&W results I am getting on premium paper equal just about anything I got from a wet darkroom. (BTW: My setup is Minolta Dimage Elite II scanner; VueScan for serious scans; Picture Window Pro for image manipulation (***** in its own right!); WinXP Home + the 2200). Last night I dug out a Kodachrome slide from a trip to Greece and the straight print from the 2200 equaled any IlfoChrome I would have printed (if I could tolerate the chemicals any more). This is a landmark product.
Hope this helps!
Hollywood, CA
8 WOW!!!! THIS THING IS AWESOME!!
I just bought this thing from Amazon and all I can say
9 My 2200 a lemon
This purchase was a nightmare. First, the printer was incompatible with my page layout program (InDesign CS) when it came to printing custom-size (poster) pages. The jobs simply won't process. One Epson technician I talked to (and there were many calls to Epson technical support) basically conceded that the 2200 doesn't do well with InDesign-type post-script software. And InDesign CS, which comes with Photoshop and Illustrator in the CS package, is not an obscure program. I was able to get some jobs out in Illustrator (cumbersome in page layout duty) but then there were problems with banded lines and jams. It's the worst purchase I ever made.
10 love it
I don't have much to compare this printer with, only a darkroom. No, it's not like the good ol' fashioned way of making photos but a fantastic alternative and that goes for black and white and color alike. Definitely read all the reviews here because you will learn from what everyone has to say. I print black and white mostly (restoration)and have fantastic results. I do have to tweek. Color management is key and my monitor is a slacker so I had to develop and intuitive feel for what the print will look like. TEST MANY PAPERS. It may be an upfront cost to test out all the different papers available and use up lots of ink but if you're serious you won't mind too much. If you're looking for "right out of the box" printing then you're going to be frustrated. You will sometimes see a mask over the printed image - PHOTO SHOP TWEEKING! It has driven me crazy at times but I won. If you're meticulous, this printer will accommodate, just be patient and really "get to know your printer" and invest some time in color management knowledge. I'm still learning more and more about things I like and don't like. It can go through some ink so be prepared to drop $ on that. The Epson Stylus Pro 4000 is on the way but you're going to spend some $ on that for sure. This is my first photo printer and have thoroughly been pleased for the money. It's a great printer to learn on...
Pros:
-really nice black and white and color printing
-larger format printing
-pretty fast (considering WHAT you're printing)
-Epson addresses so many questions - easy to find answers on the web
-color detail (gamut I think you call it) is wide and detailed (paper dependent of course)
-tweeking is a learning curve (I was not too bothered by this because I'm learning a new world of photography)
-it doesn't work with a really wide variety of printing media (according to epson)I want to try the super fine art media but it doesn't come in the right sizes
-not a lot of variety on the roll paper
11 Wonderful for color, dreadful for black and white
I have used the Epson 2200 for one year. It is a solidly constructed, durable printer that provides uncompromisingly good color prints with excellent detail and startling saturation. Unfortunately, I bought this machine to make black-and-white prints, and had high hopes for its matte black, photo black and light black system to provide superior monochrome output. Epson certainly advertised that the 2200 would provide it. It does nothing of the kind. It is manifestly impossible to make neutral black and white prints without expensive, additional driver software, a fact which Epson is careful not to mention. Without an RIP, the prints all have pervasive metamerism and color casts, usually an annoying overall green or magenta hue. I finally got lovely black and white prints only by replacing the Ultrachrome inkset with Sundance Septone (third-party) inks. My suggestion is that no one should waste time or money trying to get good black and white prints from the 2200 out of the box. You are certain to be disappointed.
12 Great Printer
My Canon S900 died... and I went with the Epson. It is just a fantastic printer. You will probably see a lot of posts about banding, complaining that it doesn't work well with other papers... that's normal for a high quality printer. The Canon was the same- any paper Other than Canon and the prints look terrible. Epson has a large assortment of papers/sizes; much more than Canon.
13 Beautiful
This printer is a gem for professionals and amateurs alike! The ink is a bit expensive (Around $9.95 for each of the seven cartridges) and seems to run out fast, but you can't beat the quality of the prints. A MUST HAVE!
14 Buy the extended warranty
This printer makes great photos. I bought this printer in August of 2002 and 15 months later the main printer head went bad. I took it to a authorized service center and was told the repair part would be $300.00 plus $100.00 labor (which I had to pay in advance) then later told the part is unavailable.
I don't want to give up on this printer it has done such a great job. The reason I purchased this printer was the great reviews for photos and I needed a wide format for drawings of cabinets and furniture I design.
I only wish I would have paid the extra for the extended warranty. If need be I will purchase another 2200 printer
15 great printer, pitiful support
This printer gets a great review and prints great photos but.... just opened and set up the printer and the setup CD doesn't work. I had to download what appear to be the drivers. There is no online support, only a phone line that puts you on hold forever or you can send them a snail mail letter. Pitiful for a supposed tech company.
16 Near or at....
I've been in photography for nearly thirty five years an have been waiting for the moment when I did not have to make excuses why my inkjet images did not compare to dye based photographs. With the Epson 2200 that moment has finally arrived.
17 Three words: Matte, semigloss, premium luster
Okay, that's four words. But three types of paper.
18 Unsurpassed Print Quality
I researched tons of color inkjet printers before deciding upon the Epson Stylus Photo 2200. I use it exclusively for my personalized prints business so both photo and text quality was must with no room for compromises. In the 4 months that I have owned this printer I have nothing but praise. No paper jams, high quality prints with little if any recognizable dithering/dots in photos, great value priced printer, also saved tons on inks with 7 seperate ink containers that can be replaced individually. This is a semi-pro printer instead of traditional consumer grade printers. Even so, I didn't really have to fiddle with anything, it worked and printed quality prints right out of the box. Yet it still has extensive setting controls to tweak prints and I had to only use it once or twice to reduce the Cyan level in advanced settings page to -10 to get as the printer rendered/printed portions of the white in the photo with a slightly greenish tint. Aside from that minor problem that was isolated and easily resolved, everything else about this printer is absolutely wonderful!
19 Saving money in the long run with 7 colors
The Epson 2200 may seem like a lot of money to put down for a 13x19 inch printer when compared to the Epson 1280 or other printers of similar size, but totaling the amount of money spent using the printer tips the scales in favor of the more expensive 2200. With seven color inks you replace each cartridge individually as opposed to a multi-ink cartridge as in the 1280 that costs three times the price and needs to be replaced even if all the inks aren't empty.
I've owned this printer for five months and have had great results. The ColorSync profile works great and have resulted in accurate colors most of the time without tweaking in Photoshop. I recommend Epson Premium Luster paper or the Enhanced Matt paper for this printer. Luster produced prints indistinguishable from photo lab prints when viewed straight on, but does show 'ghosting' in shadows when viewed at sharp angles. The main factor of this printer, and other Epson 7 color ink printers is the color life. The enhanced matt paper is rated up to 80 years when the paper is not exposed to direct airflow, and the luster is 20-25 years under the same conditions, which is the same as photo lab prints.
If you have a 4+ mpx digital camera and you want to make prints at 13x19 inches, which is essentially the same size you would print a 35mm negative on 16x20 photo paper, this printer is for you. And, 13x19 inch prints look good on a wall and matt nicely with standard 20x24 inch frames.
20 Great Printer
I wish I would have purchased this printer sooner.Right out of the box I got nice prints,it's great to print 11x14.I don't like the results on Premuin glossy but I knew that going into this purchase.Best price was Amazon,you won't be dissappoited with this printer.
21 Worth the bucks
I have an Olympus P400 (dye sub), an Epson 900 and this Epson 2200. They are all great printers. The P400 Dye sub is awesome, but can't print the big images. Using the 2200, the velvet paper (matte) produced the prettiest pictures I've seen at large sizes using the 2880 dpi print setting. Luster was nice, but I think I preferred the matte stock.
22 Professional grade photos.
This printer isn't for the average user, it isn't exactly "intuitive" or "user friendly". What it is the best photographic grade printer you can currently get for under eight hundred bucks. All of the professional photographers I know either have this printer or are planning to get one. I personally have printed nearly 400 images on the machine and most are at least twice as good as any chemical process photograph. As for the fabled "bronzing, just switch Pictorico brand paper and it's gone as well as giving you better images to boot! A friend has the Canon 9900 and it is very good but can't handle the subtle of color that the 2200 does. If you want archival prints that are better than what any custom color lab can give you then you want the Epson 2200.
23 Great, but be careful
I'll just quickly echo those below:
24 Both Positive and Negative Reviews are Accurate
This is NOT a consumer printer. It takes a lot of tweeking and you might find yourself on the phone with tech support (very good, btw) to get the results you want. In no way is this a plug and play printer: you've got to consider paper choices, ICC profiles, etc. And yes, the glossy performance is poor due to the ink characteritics. It is a great printer, but expect some frustration.
The only innacurate comment I read on these pages was about the separate ink cartridges. On this printer, each color has its own cartridge which over time will save you money. That's because colors get consumed unevenly depending on the printing you are doing. This is a good feature.
25 Don't Be Fooled By Advertisements
I am totally disappointed in the quality of prints this machine puts out. There appears to be a fine fog over your prints, I wrote Tech support and they told me that the "bronzing" was normal with UltraChrome inks. Now that would be great to know before you plunk down upwards of $700 for a wide format printer.
26 BEWARE: Archival Inks are TERRIBLE for glossy
The Epson 2200 uses archival inks that supposedly will last for 80 years...but the inks sacrifice the overall quality of the glossy prints...creating a 'bronzing issue'...which is to say that the prints have annoying reflections depending upon how they are viewed. There is also a dull sheen over the premium glossy photos that are distinctly inferior to the prints of the Epson 1280 or 820.
The matte photo results are very impressive, the colors are accurate and vibrant,this is where the printer outshines the competition. However, amongst Epson's own printers, the matte prints are no better than what you will achieve using the Epson 1280 or 820. The extra resolution is absolutely meaningless. I have scanned Medium Format film...so there was plenty of detail to be distinguished when I ran a side by side comparison test of the 820 versus the 2200. Upon close inspection the lowly stylus 820 was as good and possibly even better in the resolution department. Absurd...but true! And those printers (1280 and 820) are far less expensive, more versatile and give incomparably better glossy photos. So what's the deal? If large matte is all you print, then the printer is excellent. If you want premiums glossy as well then don't make the same mistake I did. Get the 1280 instead.
I would also add that the 2200 is of course considerably faster than the others(1280,820) when set at 720dpi(all things being equal). And it does an excellent job with text as well. So it is a bit more professional in that sense.
27 Great printer for making photo quality prints and panoramas
This is an excellent printer. I would rate it as a prosumer product. If you can afford this printer and want to print photo quality prints to frame, this is the printer for you. The paper and ink are not the easiest things to find unless you buy them on ther internet. When you buy ink be sure to find epson ink and not epson compatible ink for the best results. Also make sure that the paper you use says epson 2200 and not some other kind of epson or other branded paper. If your using the printer on a mac and are printing panoramas with a custom setting, be sure not to use the value 13 in the length or the width, the software is flawed and doesn't accept that value. Taking the above into account, you can't get a better printer for this price anywhere. I use to have panoramas printed up professionaly... Now I print my own and they look far superior.
28 Excellent prints that last
I've had my 2200 for a few months now, and I have been very pleased. From panoramic prints with the roll feeder and automatic cutter, to 8x10 enlargements of old photo scans, every pitcure has come out looking excellent. Right out of the box I was able to print a letter sized photo from my 5 MP digital camera.
29 Great printer if you're into photography
I've been using this printer for about 1/2 year now and am very pleased with the results. The quality of the prints is excellent. I also have HP and Canon printers within my house and find that the Epson produces the best results.
30 Great Quality Prints, But Ink and Paper does Add Up to Alot
The 2200 take a bit of learning if you want to get truly accurate prints and not waste alot of time and money (paper and ink). The first thing you need to do is to buy a colorimeter (spyder, etc.) and calibrate your monitor (either LCD or CRT). This is really, really crucial ... regardless of your experience in color management. You MUST do this if you want accurate results. Since I just calibrated my monitor for the first, EVERY single print has come out exactly as I saw it in Photoshop (w/ soft-proofing on). The bottom line is this: you need to learn a bit about Photoshop's color profiling abilities so you're designating the proper ICC profiles for your working space and for your destination space. So learn the bare bones of digital color workflow & calibration and you won't waste time, ink or paper. This printer is amazing. And to those of you who keep getting overly MAGENTA or GREEN prints, it's because you're not TURNING OFF the Epson Color Management settings in the printer window when you go to print. You have to have COLOR MANAGEMENT OFF in the Epson printer window when you go to print if you're print w/ color management ON in Photoshop. Take the time to learn Photoshop's color management, and you won't have any problems w/ the 2200. It's a FINE printer!
31 Excellent printer; steep learning curve requires patience
The 2200 produces beautiful prints and enlargements -- if you take the time to learn how to use it and follow all the rules.
Use the papers Epson recommends for this specific printer. Go through the options available in the printer software. And it helps enormously to calibrate your monitor using a colorimeter rather than than less precise Adobe Gamma applet that comes bundled with Photoshop and Photoshop Elements. (Amazon offers Pantone/ColorVision PhotoCal and OptiCal "prosumer" and pro calibrating packages at good prices, but this adds to the cost.)
32 Printer is not for graphic designers
Yes, the prints do look like photographs, they don't look like the sheet fed or web press piece you are attemping to comp or proof. The inks and paper cost a fortune. Figure on spending lots of time and money calibrating the colors. Then it has 7 inks, if one of them runs out -- it won't print. A set of inks runs costs over $80 and will print about 20 large sheets with heavy coverage. Even with all its warts the Epson 3000 was a much better printer for comps and press checking graphics.
33 Mac OS X Users - STAY AWAY
So basically, I have a 400+ dollar paperweight. As has been mentioned several times, the OS X compatibility issue is a major problem. Furthermore, as another reviewer cited, Epson DOESN'T CARE! I cannot get it to work with my Firewire connection (despite my Ipod, scanner and digital camera all working fine on firewire). Epson said to "call Apple", that it was "their problem" and they have never heard of anyone having a problem with firewire, and that "obviously the firewire port doesn't work!" HAH! There are complaints all over the internet about this!
34 Not Pleased
I bought the Epson 2200 because I wanted a large format printer that would produce quality prints from digital images. Unfortunately the 2200 isn't the answer. Live and learn.
I have tried every paper that I can find including Epson's Premium papers. Nothing works to my satisfaction.
Every picture I print is dull and appears to have a thin film over top of the photo. I have tried everything I know to get rid of it. If I increase the brightness of a picture that helps somewhat to rid the film but then the picture itself suffers.
I wouldn't buy another Epson product after reading and believing what was written on this product. Give me an HP or Canon any old day.
35 VERY Convincing, but NOT the REAL thing.
I bought this printer only to test the "archival" quality paper and inks. I must admit, I was quite impressed with the Luster photo paper surface; it resembled the true photographic luster surface that I am used to, but with a tighter texture. I was also quite impressed with the level of color control sliders and methods of color matching in the printer's software. (A side note, anyone who is truly concerned with accurate color will want to invest in a colorimeter and software to properly balance their monitor from a company such as Monaco; do not waste your time fighting with color matching.)
36 Read the label
I am a photographer and needed an ink-jet printer that would do justice to my high resolution photos. What's more I needed a printer that would do an impressive job on my black and whites.
When Epson announced the Stylus 2200, reviewers went wild with their praises. I had to try it to believe it. Yes, it does an impressive job on color photos and magnificent rendering of all the gray values in a black and white, but it also boasts ink that will outlast the photographer. The price is more than most consumers would pay to print out flyers or documents, but like the paperwork says, this is a photo printer. Something the documentation should be more clear on is the type of paper to use. No, you can't go to a department store and buy [just any] glossy paper and get a useable print. The special inks will not work with a lot of non-Epson paper, or even some of Epson's own paper. This is a special printer with a dedicated purpose. You have to use it as Epson intended and not as your every use printer. I also reccomend using it on the 2880 dpi setting for prints worthy of gallery display.I use the Epson Stylus Photo 820 for everything else.
37 Spectacular
I own an HP1220 and an Epson 1280. I love the 1220 for its speed and general quality, but purchased the Epson 1280 for its image image quality. Question ... how do you get the speed of the HP1220 with the print quality of the Epson 1280? Simple, buy the Epson 2200. Hooked-up to firewire, this unit delivers respectable print times with absolutely spectacular image quality. The machine is rugged, well built, and uses ink responsibly. Several reviews underscore the problems with "setup." I have no idea why. Using Windows XP, setup took just a few minutes and worked perfectly out of the box. Bottom-line: the Epson 2200 is the benchmark others will have to beat.
38 Nice prints, but ink wastage is a major problem
First, the prints are gorgeous and they say they'll last for decades. Fine.
The downside is that the ink is very expensive and this printer seems to be designed to waste an awful lot of it.
When you get a clogged nozzle, and you will get lots of them, sometimes right in the middle of printing a page, you have to clean the heads.
39 5 STARS, but with one HUGE caveat for XP users!!
At the outset, I will say, this is a wonderful printer. Quality, versatility, performance, the Epson Stylus Photo 2200 Inkjet Printer has it all.
40 Great quality, hard to find compatible paper!
Epson includes a list of approved paper to use with this Epson printer. They're dead serious. I've tried Kodak Ultima paper and other high quality papers - they don't work. You'll be greatly disappointed if you try other papers, and waste expensive ink in the process.
41 Love the product, but...
Overall, I really like this printer. The colors print out quick and sharp even on ordinary paper, and the option of printing on Super A3 is a huge bonus. There is one huge caveat, though. Ordinarily, having the ink split into 7 different colors would be a good thing, as you only have to replace that particular color when it does go out, and individual cartridges for the Epson 2200 are fairly inexpensive. But the colors do run out, and fairly rapidly at that. Within a day after getting the printer I was forced to start looking for cartridges, with none to be found at any place I went to in the Los Angeles area, even at the place where the printer was originally purchased. I found a few of the cartridges offered through Amazon.com, but I am still frantically searching for Light Cyan. Even Epson itself seems to not be supporting this product, as you cannot get the most of the cartridges from their own web site. Perhaps the product is just too new, but I find the lack of support disheartening.
42 Wonderful printer!
I've had the 2200 for a few months and have spent a lot of time getting to know it well. It is wonderful! The inks are extremely durable and hold up to water great. The role paper feature allows me to print up to 12.5"X44" to make photos that are stunning. Admittedly, since I'm a Mac X user, I have to deal with using OS 9 to access these features but it's worth the effort (unlike some reports, you can switch out black cartridges in OS X-when you switch, just delete the printer from the print center and add it again).
43 Prints as good as Ofoto
I researched photo printers for weeks and read all the reviews. I wanted a dedicated photo printer for the best prints so I did not care about text or speed. I had decided on the Epson 960 based on the PC World review that rated it just below the 2200 and above the Canons. I went to Compusa and they did not have a 960 and were sold out of the 2200 for weeks. While I was looking at the other printers a shipment of 2200's rolled in, so I bought one. I compared identical prints from the 2200 to an Ofoto print on photographic based paper and I can say they are equivalent. The 2200 had a little less contrast but better shadow detail. With magnification the the grain was about the same on both prints. I used Premium Glossy paper. You do get some obscuring sheen when you look at the 2200 prints at an angle due the pigment based ink, but it is not a problem in my opinion. I then compared these to prints from my Epson Photo 780. With the naked eye there is not much detectable difference, but with magnification you can see the ink pattern on the 780 prints. The skin tones were not as realistic. I expect with various photos the differences would become more readily apparent. I think the 2200 is a great printer but a bit expensive. The 960 may be a good choice for less $$. I wish I could have compared them side by side.
Addendum: Upon more research I've learned a big advantage of this printer over the 960 is the Ultrachrome pigment ink, which is water resistant and good for 80 years. All of the dye based inks apparently will start to fade in just a few years (or some in just a few months). There are also compatible generic papers (try Redriverpaper.com). This printer uses the same inks and has similar quality to Epson professional printers ... Getting the best prints with the 2200 may require a little tweaking of the settings and adjustments in Photoshop or the like, where you can set the contrast and color saturation to suit your eye. Plan to use some paper and ink experimenting. Professional photographers and artists like this printer a lot. It is outstanding for black and white and for artistic papers such as matte and card stock, and of course it prints pics up to 13 inches wide and 40+ long. If you want the best and have the know-how (or want to learn), this is the printer to get.
44 TWICE AS EXPENSIVE - FOUR TIMES THE QUALITY
I have had my Epson 2200 for two weeks now and it is worth the hype. The reviews found in this area strongly suggesting the use of Epson paper and anticipated heavy ink usage are right on the mark. However, if you want prints superior to those provided by a photo store, this is your printer. If you don't plan to do photos, then buy a cheaper printer. This is too much machine for you. If you do buy it, there is a learning curve. Expect to eat up a quantity of paper and ink in identifying the best settings for your needs. But when you get there - wow - what a printer.
45 Look out Mac Users! Epson thinks you're second rate!
With all the hype and buzz about this printer, Epson has released it before it's ready to use! Most of the advanced features (the one's I bought it for) don't work with OS X and Epson is blatantly unapologetic about it. You can't use the Roll Feeder, You can't use the Paper Cuter, You can't use the Straight Path Feed Through, You can't swap out the custom black inks.... boy I'm getting tired of listing the things you can't do. Maybe I should just list the things you can do.... you can do a plain print. There that was easy. And of course they don't advertise this or print disclaimers on the box or anything....Nooooo! Deception? It ain't all it's cracked up to be so save your money til Epson gets a clue and makes drivers that actually work. P.S. They are going to try and blame this on Apple, all my other apps run on OS X just fine. It's all really too bad because the prints are gorgeous! And oh yes, I've yet to meet anyone who could get the firewire connection to work.
46 2200s Firewire Connection Burns Me Up
I have tried and tried every configuration imaginable to get my Epson 2200 to work with a firewire connection. Everytime it freezes my computer. As long as I have another firewire device connected, and do not uninstall the utilities that install with the driver the printer freezes my system. Firewire adapter cards come with 2, 3, or 4 ports-- why! because you can put 2,3, or 4 devices on them! BUT NOT AN EPSON 2200. (W)
Windows 2000 Pro NT
Pent 4 1.8 gig
Maxtor 120 gig harddrive
512 memory
47 out of stock for months
So what if it's a good product if no one has it in stock? Epson is totally unresponsive! Epson is promoting the product, yet it's not producing enough units so that people can buy it!
48 Epson 2200 V Canon S9000
If you are interested in an Epson 2200 then the chances are you want 13x19 output (or roll) and long lasting prints. Otherwise why read this review hey? If so then you possibly have also considered a Canon S9000.
49 Very Nice!!
Yes, I've read some of the other reviews on this printer and some good points are made on which papers to use for the best quality prints. But I can't agree with only 2 or 3 stars either. Standard glossy paper hasn't done well for for me for some reason, neither was I impressed with Epsons archival matte paper either, but others I know like it. However, media choice is the key to getting this printer to reach its optimum potential. Using Epsons line of premium papers produces photos that rival any I have had done at pro photo labs.
I am extremely fond of the Premium Luster and Premium Semi-gloss papers. The colors are very well saturated with very good contrast. After scanning the negs and doing some minimal touch-up in photoshop to my liking, I import the files to film factory. Film factory is bundled with this printer and is a very user friendly application to make printing quite easy. Yes, there is a small learning curve to see what this printer likes, but, it didn't take long before I was producing prints that you couldn't tell from the photo lab. In fact, after some adjustment on portraits especially, I liked mine better. The quality is excellent!
Ink usage is not bad overall, with the exception of the light inks especially the light magenta which seems to be its favorite to use, followed closely by light cyan and light black. However, because each color is in its own cartridge makes it to where you change only those that run low and not all of the colors at once.
Set up was easy and we were printing in just a short time. But as I said the learning curve on media use sure wasted some ink and paper. I cannot stress enough using the premium papers with this printers while also having sufficient file size for the larger prints. I've run several different 20MB 8X10's that were tack sharp on the 1440 setting. However I prefer files of 30-plus megs and larger for most 8X10's and 11X14's.
With just a little practice, anyone can be printing like a pro right from your desktop. Yes there are cheaper ones out there, but I've learned you get what you pay for. And, it depends on your needs. But for prints that will rival most film labs, the 2200 is a winner.
50 Mixed feelings
Great print quality on premium glossy photo paper when you look at them directly - but terrible when you looked at them from an angle. They look splotchy and not "glossy". Epson kind of acknowledges this but says it will look better on matt or semi-matt papers.
51 Do not be blinded by the hype!
While this printer is indeed better than many, it still has a long, long way to go to compete with your analog print producer on the corner. You *will* see grain and red-saturated prints in spite of your best efforts. If you must have an Epson, they offer comparable quality sub [price]
52 Shattered the previous limits of my Digital Photography...
I have only had my 2200 for 2 weeks so far, but have enjoyed using it immensely. I have a 5.1 megapixal cam, but was disappointed that my great "on-screen" photos didn't look the same when printed out. I even purchased a Sony dye-sublimation printer, thinking that pairing it with the Sony cam (DSCF707) would produce great results. I was limited to a maximum print size of 4x6", and the final pictures were not thrillingly vivid. I used my Canon S300 to print larger 8x10's of my vacation shots. It did great for a 100 dollar printer, but again, fell short of my camera's ability to produce great photos.
I knew there had to be a printer out there that could meet my expectations. After shopping around I purchased one that claimed to print over 5 megapixals, but returned it after reading it's poor reviews. (Lex....)
Enter the Epson 2200... Wow...all the reviews and information I read on it sounded GREAT, so I ordered it, and waited impatiently for 2 weeks for it to arrive. I ordered extra paper and cartridges, knowing I would burn a lot of both to get the hang of the printer.
So far the pictures have exceeded my expectations, and then some. I have used the Epson Premium Gloss, Semi-Gloss, Premium Luster, Archival Matte, and Watercolor papers. The Premium Luster produces the most professional looking, and feeling photo, and contrary to other comments about the matte paper...I have had excellent results with it. (I have only used the Epson Archival/Enhanced Matte Paper on the "auto" mode using Print Image Matching) In fact, it rivals the depth and color of my glossier paper, without the glare...and my B&W prints never looked better.
A word to the wise. This printer specifies only certain papers for best results. I would not put low grade gas into a fine auotmobile, nor cheap paper into my Epson 2200.
I am still learning the software, and how to edit the photos for best color, etc. So far, with the exception of a couple of prints, I have had the best results printing the photos untouched, with Print Image Matching. It seems to print my pictures very close to the way they appear on the Monitor.
As for the ink, I have printed over 30 8x10's or larger, and my lowest 2 cartridges are around 25% ..the rest at still half, or above.
To say the least, I am VERY happy with this printer. It has re-kindled my desire to frame that perfect photo...and givin me the ability to flawlessly transfer it onto paper.
Happy photo taking! JW
53 Do you need a semi pro photo printer?
I've had my Epson 2200 for about six weeks. With free shipping Amazon's price was best on the net. Looked at Canon's and Epson's lower end models. I thought the Epson outperformed the Canon tonally. Have done about 45 8x10 glossies with medium grade Epson paper. Not disappointed in the output. Two pics were banded and short colored. Did a basic head cleaning and that corrected the problem. The light toned inks are used at slightly more than twice the rate of the dark tones. Am just now looking for a replacement for light magenta cartridge. I figure amortized cost per pic is about 1.25 per print with ink paper and printer costs combined. If you demand quality output for your pics with a fairly low volumne output, this is a hard printer to beat right now. If you're not too concerned about darker toning and flatter colors you can probably get by with something half as pricey. I'm delighted with mine.
54 Disappointed- Real Photo Prints difficult to acheive
I've been using the Epson 1200 for 3 yrs to produce excellent glossy prints up to 11x14. Only problem is slight "bronzing" on black areas and lack of "archivalness". I print and sell wildlife photos and am extremely critical in how it will look hanging on a wall.
55 An Unbelieveable Companion to Nikon's D100!
I have had the opportunity to play around with this printer for a few days and must say that the output is the most amazing that I have ever seen from a consumer oriented inkjet printer. Now, there are some points that are problematic, but I believe that overall, this printer deserves the 5 stars.
56 Disappointing monochrome
Just began using my new Epson 2200 printer. I am disappointed in the depth of the black printer using Epsons Premium glossy paper I can't get the rich, deep blacks I got with my Epson 1200 printer using the same paper.The 2200 has a longer scale thsn the 1200 and it colors are more accurate with less of a green or magenta cast. But the 2200's lackluster black printing is causing me to rethink my purchase
57 Great results right out of the box
I had dithered (so to speak) for over a year about moving to inkjet printing. I had researched Piezo and the MIS inks, etc., etc. The initial reviews/spec's motivated me to get the 2200 and I have zero regrets.
58 epson stylus 2200
received this printer only to have two faulty ink cartilages (still being cleared by epson). bought a pair and started printing sample papers from all over (red river polar gloss has equal output quality verus epson's premium luster paper).
At around 1200 dpi the test images are excellent with great satutation and contrast (at default settings) baby skin came out near perfect to the monitor. metalics are not grainy and the the multi color thread spool are rich and detailed. gradients dare i say are comparable to traditional photo-prints.
Printing is on the slow side when compared to other ink-jet printers. other then the oddly relaxing whishing sound its makes very little noise. heavy foot print on the desk. heavy with nice rugged construction (metal bracings).
was reviewed by lou (industrial designer) and joy (photograper)
59 A great photo printer
Just purchased the 2200 after owning a series of Epson printers (the last being the 870) as well as a couple of Canons and one Alps along the way. For photos, this printer rocks! Using the Epson premium photo papers (I have tried the glossy and the semi-glossy) the photo prints are stunning. Initially, I was not so impressed because I printed on standard Epson glossy photo paper and the result was a bit washed out. To get the great results this printer is capable of it is necessary to use Epson premium papers, which come in a wide variety of sizes. For photos, this printer is much better than anything I used previously and has the additional advantage of accomodating large sized photo paper. I am using a Pentium 4 with XP Pro. It should be noted though that there have been some complaints about using this printer with a Mac since many of the features are apparently not supported on the Mac.
60 Epson 2200 Review
1. For baseline, I have used an Epson 1280 for the past two years.
2. The only reason to get this printer is if one wants longer life prints. The print quality / image is MORE difficult to achieve with this printer--not impossible, but more difficult. Overall, the paper profiles are fairly good (epson papers)--the colors are fairly accurate. However, the prints are definitely "flatter" (ie less contrast, less saturation) compared to the 1280--this can be worked around to a large extent by simply increasing contrast (esp the black point) and saturation...around by 10 points.
3. Overall, I like the 1280 prints better to a slight degree, but if viewed by itself without a comparison print, the prints from the 2200 are good. Furthermore, with the increase in print life, overall it's a decent compromise for me. One has to evaluate their own priorities to see if it would be worth it for them.
61 Caveat emptor
Before you buy this printer, be warned: YOU CANNOT PRINT BORDERLESS ON MATTE PAPER! I print hundreds of matte pages a month on a Stylus Photo 820...and upgraded to the 2200 because of its touted matte ink capability. But once you put the matte cartridge in, you can't select border-free printing on the sides. And printing with the photo cartridge is indeed an inferior option, if you're looking for crisp, sharp blacks on matte paper, so "fooling" the printer by saying you're printing on photo paper doesn't work.
I can only hope Epson is working on a driver update, as I'm ready to send this printer back.
62 A hidden caveat.
Before you buy this printer, be warned: YOU CANNOT PRINT BORDERLESS ON MATTE PAPER! I print hundreds of B&W and color pages a month of matte paper on a Stylus Photo 820 (a ($$$) printer), and upgraded to the 2200 because of its touted matte ink capability. But once you put the matte cartridge in, you can't select border-free printing on the sides. And printing with the photo cartridge is indeed an inferior option, if you're looking for crisp, sharp blacks on matte paper, so "fooling" the printer by saying you're printing on photo paper doesn't work.
I can only hope Epson is working on a driver update, as I'm ready to send this printer back.
63 An awesome printer!
This is what we've been waiting for. Gorgeous prints right out of the box. Do buy the matte black ink for the Enhanced Matte Paper and other non-glossy papers. You won't be happy with your prints using Photo Black ink on the matte paper. The prints are less contrasty than with the 1270/1280's. Print speed is quicker than with the 2000P. I had no luck using the profiles that came with it. My prints are beautiful using Adobe RGB colorspace in Photoshop and setting print dialog to "same as source". This is an excellent investment for digital photographers.
64 Can't wait to get my hands on this!!
I have been in the market for a new photo printer for about a month now. After reading reviews and magazine articles I've decided to go with an Epson even though I usually buy HP's. What is really exciting me is the archival quality inks that this printer uses, and the photo quality that other Epson's exhibit. (I'm sure this will continue the high standard of excellence.) There is only one thing that is holding me back a bit. A similar Epson printer (the 1280) is a real ink hog. Obviously, this can add up fast when printing photos that require a full page of ink, but I am willing to accept this for a great printer.
Where are the calculations that go with a calculated risk?
What if nothing exists and we're all in somebody's dream? Or what's worse,
what if only that fat guy in the third row exists?
-- Woody Allen, "Without Feathers"
