Premium price doesn't necessarily deliver the best images
Written: May 07 '03 (Updated Dec 06 '03)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Ease of Use: |
 |
|
| Paper Handling: |
 |
|
|
Pros: Does well with Matte paper, prints fast
Cons: Premium Glossy photos suffer from bronzing...
The Bottom Line: The archival inks create a bronzing issue on glossy photos...which lessens the three dimensional feel of the image. Consider the Epson 1280 instead.
|
|
|
| antonio777's Full Review: Epson Stylus Photo 2200 Inkjet Printer |
Warning; 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.
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.
(For borderless matte photos you will have to download the 2100 driver from the Epson UK website.)
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 a mistake, get the 1280 instead.
People who tout this machine as the ultimate probably have never seen the output of Epson's dye printers. What's more, they've improved their dyes so that longetivity should no longer be such an issue. I've had dye prints well over a year exposed in a frame that have not faded...and still look better than a fresh print off the 2200.
Others will tell you that the 2200 gives greater shadow detail than the dye printers. More nonsense. This is a merely a matter of adjusting the default settings on the dye printers for less contrast. Personally, I prefer the vividness of the dye print...even if this were the case.
Sometimes, you don't get what you pay for.
(Update: 10/03 I ended up selling this printer and purchasing the 1280)
Recommended:
No
Amount Paid (US$): 699
Operating System: Windows
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
antonio777
|
|
Reviews written: 3
Trusted by: 3 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.