[ibook_steve]

I'm beginning to think that inkjet technology should just die. I have an Epson Photo R340. It's about 3 years old. Now I don't print color every day, or even every month. It's nice to have to print out the occasional photo or color document. However, every time I use it, it's a production:

Clean the heads, check the heads, heads need more cleaning, check the heads, still need more cleaning, etc., etc.

This process just wastes ink like crazy. And I still end up with a few missing little lines on the nozzle check page. Is there such a thing as an inkjet printer that doesn't require head cleaning every time you use it (or at least only one automatic cycle)? Can anybody make any recommendations?

Steve

[Veltliner]

I'm not completely on top of what's going on in inkjet printers.

But:

1. Three years are quite a lot with inkjets.

2. Lower end Epsons are known for this issue.

3. If you want to print photos, you need an inkjet.

4. Dye ink cloggs less, so I heard. For example the Canon Pixma Pro 9000.

5. Modern pigment ink is better, and less clogging.

6. Try the hair dryer approach. Take the inkjet head, and blow hot air on it, but don't make it boiling hot. Ink could get flowing again. I didn't try it, just read about it in today's new york times article about "low tech solutions for high tech problems".

[Koralatov]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

3. If you want to print photos, you need an inkjet.

I’d have to agree with this. My work has an amazing laser (some massive Canon copier/printer/scanner), but it’s not great for photos — mainly because the toner doesn’t adhere to photographic paper particularly well. When it does stick properly (about 60–70% of the time), it actually coats the paper, obscuring the finish and making for a poor image. Inkjets seem to ‘soak in’ to the paper, which results in a much better image. In essence, the inkjet’s prints actually resemble proper photos, whereas the laser’s don’t.

That said, I really don’t like inkjets for day-to-day text work. It’s not a resolution issue, it’s one of clarity — the toner makes for a much cleaner, sharper result as it doesn’t get absorbed by the paper.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by ibook_steve 

I'm beginning to think that inkjet technology should just die. I have an Epson Photo R340.

There's your problem right there. Epsons clog, and everyone has known this for years. The only situations where they don't clog is when they get constant use (like several times weekly).

Don't knock inkjet just because Epson still can't make heads that don't clog.

Go out, buy a Canon and be happy. (HP doesn't have clogging problems, either, but I like Canon's machines better. The high-end HPs are good though. Forget about Lexmark.)

What are you looking for in a printer? Give me a good idea and I'll suggest something.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

2. Lower end Epsons are known for this issue.
4. Dye ink cloggs less, so I heard. For example the Canon Pixma Pro 9000.
5. Modern pigment ink is better, and less clogging.
6. Try the hair dryer approach. Take the inkjet head, and blow hot air on it, but don't make it boiling hot. Ink could get flowing again. I didn't try it, just read about it in today's new york times article about "low tech solutions for high tech problems".

2. It has nothing to do with how expensive the printer was. The reason people think that is that expensive Epsons tend to be purchased by people/companies that print very frequently, and it's the frequent use that prevents clogging.
4. Almost all inkjets use dye color ink, with a few exceptions. Black pigment ink is standard.
5. Many pigment printers (esp. for black) have been around since the early days of inkjets with no unusual clogging problems.
6. Epsons do not have removable print heads, so this tip is impossible for the OP to use -- plus it sounds totally bogus to me. (I saw it in the NYT today, too, and the fact that I've NEVER heard of it before -- I'm a total printer nerd, mind you -- makes me really doubt the provenance of that "tip".)

[Simon]

Originally Posted by ibook_steve 

I'm beginning to think that inkjet technology should just die.

I agree. After having spent a fortune on HP ink cartridges and watching more ink evaporate than I ever used, I switched to an HP LaserJet at home. It was an excellent decision. Much faster, much quieter, much better quality. The toner cartridge doesn't cost more than all the ink cartridges did but it lasts forever. Did I mention the LaserJet is really FAST.

I don't regret giving up color for all the advantages of the LaserJet. What I do regret is not having done it any earlier.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Koralatov 

That said, I really don’t like inkjets for day-to-day text work. It’s not a resolution issue, it’s one of clarity — the toner makes for a much cleaner, sharper result as it doesn’t get absorbed by the paper.

You need to pick different paper, then. Inkjets are very picky about paper, and you will find that some brands of paper work better in a given printer model than others. Also, you may find that one side of the paper works better than the other.

In contrast, black-and-white lasers are pretty much indifferent when it comes to paper. Color laser, on the other hand, is even pickier than inkjet.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Simon 

I agree. After having spent a fortune on HP ink cartridges and watching more ink evaporate than I ever used,

HP does have head-cleaning-ink recycling tank systems in their midrange printers and up, so that should reduce ink loss somewhat in those boxes.

Still don't like the HP stuff much, though.

[OreoCookie]

Yes, certainly. There are many and it depends on what you're doing. Inkjets beat color lasers hands down when it comes to photos or things with many color gradients. Furthermore, they're much better when printing slides (the reason being that toner particles are reflective). Lasers are better when you print a lot and you don't need great-looking pictures. For colored graphs and text they're great.

Canon makes very good inkjets and the drivers don't suck like HP's. (Although their OfficeJet series is quite decent.)

[ibook_steve]

I've always wanted to get a Canon, but for some reason, back when I bought the R340, the reviews (and price) seemed better for the Epson. But if it's known that most, if not all Epson inkjets have the clogging problem, I'll take a look at Canon.

I like having a B&W laser for day-to-day printing (I have an old Brother that has had zero problems), but when you occasionally need color or a photo, it seems you still need a color inkjet. I'm going to check out Canon.

Steve

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by tooki 

4. Almost all inkjets use dye color ink, with a few exceptions. Black pigment ink is standard.

Are you sure about that?

All Epsons are pigment printers, many HPs. I remember being stared at because I bought a dye printer (no, I don't need 5000 years archival quality).

There have been dozens of photographers beaten to death by other photographers regarding the dye versus pigment ink battle (comparable to Canon/Nikon and PC/Mac). I always felt the dye guys were an absolute minority these days.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by Simon 

I agree. After having spent a fortune on HP ink cartridges and watching more ink evaporate than I ever used, I switched to an HP LaserJet at home. It was an excellent decision. Much faster, much quieter, much better quality. The toner cartridge doesn't cost more than all the ink cartridges did but it lasts forever. Did I mention the LaserJet is really FAST.

I don't regret giving up color for all the advantages of the LaserJet. What I do regret is not having done it any earlier.

For text it's the best. I have an HP laser printer, and it's great.

But the OP wants to print photos.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by ibook_steve 

I've always wanted to get a Canon, but for some reason, back when I bought the R340, the reviews (and price) seemed better for the Epson. But if it's known that most, if not all Epson inkjets have the clogging problem, I'll take a look at Canon.

I like having a B&W laser for day-to-day printing (I have an old Brother that has had zero problems), but when you occasionally need color or a photo, it seems you still need a color inkjet. I'm going to check out Canon.

Steve

If you plan to buy a camera or if you know someone who does: at these occasions they almost force you to accept a printer for free.

Check out the Canon 9000. It's been around for a while but has good reviews. Just be careful about the paper you buy. Some paper are for pigment only and have chemicals in the upper layer that destroy dye ink immediately. It's like Mac and PC: you need to get dye paper (or allround paper) when you print with a dye printer, and pigment ink paper or allround paper for a pigment printer.

[Ted L. Nancy]

Originally Posted by tooki 

Go out, buy a Canon and be happy.

Ditto.

[Big Mac]

I vowed never to buy an Epson inkjet again a while back. I don't know how a company with such poor quality standards stays in business.

I also recommend Canon now.

[seanc]

I've got an Epson CX3200 all-in-one in the cupboard. I must chuck it out.

I just replaced it with an HP OfficeJet 2840 colour laser printer.
This made my Epson Aculaser C3100 with ridiculously expensive consumables; obsolete - thankfully when I bought it (for spares/repair - eBay £3!) 5 years ago, it came with a full set of toners and I've still never had to replace them.
It has also replaced my HP LaserJet 2100 B/W laser printer - I need to find a good home for that since I refurbished all of the rollers and separator pads not too long ago.

[EndlessMac]

Originally Posted by tooki 

Epsons clog, and everyone has known this for years. The only situations where they don't clog is when they get constant use (like several times weekly).

Don't knock inkjet just because Epson still can't make heads that don't clog.

I have an Epson printer. I have never had it clog and sometimes I don't use it for months. I love the prints it gives me.

Originally Posted by tooki 

Go out, buy a Canon and be happy. (HP doesn't have clogging problems, either, but I like Canon's machines better. The high-end HPs are good though. Forget about Lexmark.)

I had a Canon printer and I went with Epson after that...been happy ever since. I'm sorry you have had bad experiences with Epson but I've been happy with them.

[angelmb]

I just wish someone could point me towards the way to find the cheapest Canon cartridges the better… I have spent mega bucks the last two weeks and I don't print that much. On the positive side of things, the MP530 and the Pixma Pro9000 use the same cartridges so I can swap one here from there just in case of extreme need…

The LaserJet 2100TN toner on the other hand, lasts longer than life… I don't get it, it is a ten years old printer and still runs with the very first toner.

As for dye or pigment, here is an extract from the Leica Magazine… I don't have the full article, sorry.

[djr582]

After much trial and error attempting to clean inkjets I have found that good old electric Contact Cleaner works great. I use CRC brand QD Contact Cleaner, quick drying formula, but any brand should do. YMMV and use at your own risk. Observe the safety info on the label.

[OreoCookie]

@angelmb
That depends on how much you print. I print about 7,500-10,000 pages per year and I use up one cartridge for that. It's all about volume.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by ibook_steve 

I've always wanted to get a Canon, but for some reason, back when I bought the R340, the reviews (and price) seemed better for the Epson. But if it's known that most, if not all Epson inkjets have the clogging problem, I'll take a look at Canon.

I like having a B&W laser for day-to-day printing (I have an old Brother that has had zero problems), but when you occasionally need color or a photo, it seems you still need a color inkjet. I'm going to check out Canon.

Be a good OP and tell me what your needs are so I can guide you in the right direction.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

Are you sure about that?

All Epsons are pigment printers, many HPs. I remember being stared at because I bought a dye printer (no, I don't need 5000 years archival quality).

There have been dozens of photographers beaten to death by other photographers regarding the dye versus pigment ink battle (comparable to Canon/Nikon and PC/Mac). I always felt the dye guys were an absolute minority these days.

Noooo... definitely not. For the purposes of this post, I will be talking about color inks and photo black; it's standard for plain-paper black to be pigment, even on printers with otherwise dye inks.

Dye inks are popular because they're cheap, can be applied faster (->faster printing), and most of all, have wider color gamut. Examples include the venerable Canon Pixma Pro9000.

Canon uses dye inks across the board, except for the Pixma Pro9500, which is pigment.

Epson now uses pigment across the board, I believe, but this is a recent development; most Epsons, historically speaking, have been dye. Some professional poster printers from Epson could be ordered with dye or pigment.

HP is dye for most models. Their large-format models might be pigment, I'm not sure.

It would certainly be patent nonsense to say that dye is gone. It still offers the best color quality and gamut (no weird metallic sheen on glossy papers, either), and also is the only option for printing transparencies, since pigments are opaque (so they look color when viewed like paper, but appear black and white when projected).

[tooki]

Originally Posted by EndlessMac 

I have an Epson printer. I have never had it clog and sometimes I don't use it for months. I love the prints it gives me.

I had a Canon printer and I went with Epson after that...been happy ever since. I'm sorry you have had bad experiences with Epson but I've been happy with them.

I'm glad you had good luck, but me and about Eleventy Billion™ other Epson users ran into the persistent clogging problems. A quick internet search will confirm this.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

Check out the Canon 9000. It's been around for a while but has good reviews. Just be careful about the paper you buy. Some paper are for pigment only and have chemicals in the upper layer that destroy dye ink immediately. It's like Mac and PC: you need to get dye paper (or allround paper) when you print with a dye printer, and pigment ink paper or allround paper for a pigment printer.

The Canon Pixma Pro9000 is fantastic, but unless the OP needs to print 13x19" posters, it's overkill -- the same print quality can be bought in 8.5x11" for much less money.

As for papers... just buy Ilford Smooth series papers and call it a day. They're cheap, just as good as Canon's own expensive papers, and are instant-dry papers (and therefore work in both dye and pigment printers).

[EndlessMac]

Originally Posted by tooki 

I'm glad you had good luck, but me and about Eleventy Billion™ other Epson users ran into the persistent clogging problems. A quick internet search will confirm this.

It's clear you feel strongly about the issue so I'll just say that I'm not against Canon. Canon printers have their own share of problems which doesn't sound like it from this thread.

And as remarkably accurate as your Eleventy Billion™ user clog problem statement you forgot to say Eleventy Billion™ minus one.

[ibook_steve]

As I said, occasional color printouts and occasional photos are all I need. I just want to be able to say, "hey, I want to make a color printout of maybe a photo or something on the web and not have to waste ink by cleaning the printer if I haven't used it for more than 2 days!"

Steve

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

@angelmb
That depends on how much you print. I print about 7,500-10,000 pages per year and I use up one cartridge for that. It's all about volume.

What do you print… the new black flat Mercedes-Benz logo and one per page!? Color me impressed…  No way I had printed a tenth part of that since I got the two Canon printers and I am in need to buy my sixth color cartridge, my first black one for the 9000 and my first black one -double sized- for the 530.

[OreoCookie]

I print lots of scientific papers. So I have a laser printer with a built-in duplexer. Very reliable printer, only some rubber roll which grabs the sheets of papers has been replaced. Other than that, I have had zero problems with this printer.

With color printers, you tend to use more ink/toner/whatever, because pictures use up a lot more than just text. I can see why you want to move away from inkjets, but there is really no replacement that delivers the same IQ (unless you want to buy something like the Olympus P-440).

I agree that Canons are really good. I used to have a Canon S630 and I've printed tons of pages with that one, too. My father hijacked it to print presentations and handouts in color (usually 25-50 at 20 pages a pop). Although I have no way of knowing for sure, I reckon it has lasted for 10-20k pages.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by ibook_steve 

As I said, occasional color printouts and occasional photos are all I need. I just want to be able to say, "hey, I want to make a color printout of maybe a photo or something on the web and not have to waste ink by cleaning the printer if I haven't used it for more than 2 days!"

Every inkjet is going to clean its heads after periods of rest, and also occasionally during long print jobs (like every 25 pages or so). There is no way around this, short of buying a color laser.

But at least a Canon (or HP, for that matter) will not die from being used only sporadically.

[JTh]

I might suggest this alternative if you only print color a few times per year: Send it to a local store. I took a flash drive with a newsletter in JPEG format (created in Pages 09), with some ridiculously high DPI over to Staples. They printed a couple sample pages for me, so I could assess the quality. (sidenote: I tried PDF first, but for whatever reason, it didn't print correctly; something in their software).

It wasn't "cheap"; I think it was 60 cents per page and I spent around $30 total. But the quality was outstanding - it was obviously printed on a commercial-grade multi function device. And in the end, I figured they can spend the money to upgrade the printer, buy the toner, maintenance, repairs, and so on. Plus, they had a number of paper styles to choose from, so I didn't have 200 sheets of paper I'd probably never use again.

Anyway, most places I checked out accepted many file formats. They can also accept files by email or through their website. Therefore, since I only print color once or twice per year, it'd probably never work out for me to buy any color printer.

[Gavin]

I will never buy another epson.

They use chips in the cartridge to keep you from refilling it and force you to buy their ink. So cartridges are expensive. The chips fail, and so a brand new cartridge will sometimes register as empty - the printer will not let you use it. You have to try take it back to the store and hope they will take it back.

Their tech support refused to talk to me because the printer was over x months old. They would not even answer a single question. I've never been so rudely treated in my life.

On top of that they waste lots of ink cleaning the heads.

I lean toward cannon now.

Please do not buy an epson.

[Eug]

My Epson inkjet at work clogs. It's an old printer though.

My Canon i960 inkjet at home doesn't seem to clog, even though I don't print much with it. 99% of my printing is with my Samsung laser printer. Laser is better with text on standard paper, and is much, much cheaper.

P.S. To save money with the Canon I tried using 3rd party inks. They sucked royally. I had to go back to Canon, but the ink costs way too much. The other problem is that the Canon sensor tells me I'm out of ink too early, and then refuses to print. Sure, there is no more pools of liquid left cassette, but even so it's usually good for some time after that since there's still a fair amount of ink left in that sponge thing. So what I do is remove the cartridge and then replace it, to get another 2-digit number of pages out of it.

[Goldfinger]

For my document printing need I use a small Canon Pixma IP3000, it's real quick and doesn't use too much ink.
For photo printing there is nothing that beats the Epsons with K3-ink quality wise. The latest ones don't clog. But I wouldn't recomend them if you do a lot of text printing. Just get one of those A4 Pixma's from Canon (or whatever they're called these days).

[Spheric Harlot]

The pixma's started using chips in their ink tanks sometime after the ipX000 series.

What I love about my iP3000 is that it's never, absolutely never, given me any trouble, and that it will go on printing even if magenta is empty, because I need the rough draft and really don't give a crap whether the black text will have just the right shade of pink.

Apparently the newer ones aren't as cool, though.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Eug 

They sucked royally. I had to go back to Canon, but the ink costs way too much. The other problem is that the Canon sensor tells me I'm out of ink too early, and then refuses to print. Sure, there is no more pools of liquid left cassette, but even so it's usually good for some time after that since there's still a fair amount of ink left in that sponge thing. So what I do is remove the cartridge and then replace it, to get another 2-digit number of pages out of it.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

What I love about my iP3000 is that it's never, absolutely never, given me any trouble, and that it will go on printing even if magenta is empty, because I need the rough draft and really don't give a crap whether the black text will have just the right shade of pink.

Apparently the newer ones aren't as cool, though.

it's actually really simple, guys: the Canons (even ones with chips!) read the ink level optically. If there's no ink in the reservoir, the printer gives you the out of ink warning. This is good if, say, you want to print an 8.5x11 photo. But if it's a couple of small photos, or non-photo pages, you just press the Continue button on the printer (icon of a sheet with an arrow on or above it), and it will happily resume printing. Just be careful if you do this: watch the printer and IMMEDIATELY replace the empty cartridge once streaking begins -- otherwise you may damage the printhead.

As for Canon's ink costs: they're still lower than 3rd party ink for Epsons and HPs!

[tooki]

Originally Posted by Goldfinger 

For photo printing there is nothing that beats the Epsons with K3-ink quality wise. The latest ones don't clog..

Yeah, right. That's what Epson fanboys have been saying for years, but the problems keep cropping up! (I'm not calling you a fanboy, FYI!)

[Veltliner]

The clogging problem and the bad customer service is what you regularly hear about Epson.

This is why I went with Canon. Epson used to be ahead, but no longer. HP Designjets and Canon printers match Epson's quality.

What Tooki said, it's true. There are people out there who get mad if you say Epson is not the best.

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by tooki 

As for Canon's ink costs: they're still lower than 3rd party ink for Epsons and HPs!

Anybody have had good experience with 3rd party ink cartridges for Canon?, of those I have tested all need the original chip from the 'legit' Canon cartridges and such a solution sometimes works, sometimes doesn't… Besides that, Canon chips are smart like a fox, you can't use a chip from a cyan ink cartridge with a yellow ink cartridge, et cetera.

[tooki]

I've heard they're not worth the trouble -- chip problems occur only occasionally, but print quality suffers pretty much invariably, and cartridge yield is variable. (What's the point in saving 15% on the cartridge if it prints 20% less, and with lower print quality?)

[OreoCookie]

Back when I still owned an inkjet, my personal verdict was that third-party inks don't look as good as the original and that was reason alone to go for Canons. Besides, even the original was cheaper than HP three-color ink tanks.

[Spheric Harlot]

Since they've started using chips, canon ink has got pricier.

[OreoCookie]

Yes, they've picked up a bad habit.

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by tooki 

I've heard they're not worth the trouble

I totally agree with you, my post was mostly rhetorical than anything else.

[indigoimac]

Here are my thoughts:

I have an Epson R320, basically a variation of the op's r340, the r300, etc they're all the same on the inside. #1 tip - leave it on... always, the "ink charging" process when you turn it on guzzles ink. My printer is now about 2 or 3 years (probably slightly older than yours) and prints like new... even though it is maybe used once a week at most. I found the tip about leaving it on on some photo forum googling one day and gave it a shot after having the printer for 3 or 4 months... it had eaten through an ink set in 2 months and I was looking to find out why... This printer replaced an epson stylus 740 mostly because I wanted a good photo printer. I have been very satisfied with it.

So, I was satisfied enough that I bought another Epson for school, a C120, it was like 60-70$, I was not expecting much. It's fast, but it is always a production to print, it's simply not a serious printer, I have however found that leaving it on all the time seems to help, but not as much as the r320. I've also started using ink off of eBay, they claim to be genuine carts but w/e and it seems to be content with those. It's an average printer.

Long story short - try keeping the printer on and see if that works better for you.

[EndlessMac]

Originally Posted by Veltliner 

There are people out there who get mad if you say Epson is not the best.

I'm not saying you are accusing me, but I want to make it clear that I'm not one of those people. I fully admit Epson have their problems but this thread is coming across as a Canon fanboy and Epson bashing discussion.

All of the different brands have their good and bad points. The Canon printer I owned had problems my Epson doesn't so for me it was a good experience when I switched.

And for the record I prefer HP printers for laser printing.

[tooki]

Originally Posted by indigoimac 

I have an Epson R320, basically a variation of the op's r340, the r300, etc they're all the same on the inside. #1 tip - leave it on... always, the "ink charging" process when you turn it on guzzles ink.

That advice has no effect at best, and causes problems at worst.

Printers don't clean the heads purely because you turn it on, they clean them when they haven't been used in a while. As long as it's stayed plugged in the whole time, the printer shouldn't really care whether it was "turned on" or not, it just says "hey I haven't printed in a week, I need to be cleaned".

The flip side is this: anecdotally, some printers do not fully cover the print head when they're left on, ostensibly accelerating clogging by allowing the head to dry out. (I think this was more a problem with older models, but I'm not willing to risk it.) So there is a risk that by leaving it on, unused, for extended periods of time can damage it.

I like my Canons that can be programmed to power on and off automatically, so I don't have to worry about that nonsense anymore.

[indigoimac]

Originally Posted by tooki 

That advice has no effect at best, and causes problems at worst.

Printers don't clean the heads purely because you turn it on, they clean them when they haven't been used in a while. As long as it's stayed plugged in the whole time, the printer shouldn't really care whether it was "turned on" or not, it just says "hey I haven't printed in a week, I need to be cleaned".

The flip side is this: anecdotally, some printers do not fully cover the print head when they're left on, ostensibly accelerating clogging by allowing the head to dry out. (I think this was more a problem with older models, but I'm not willing to risk it.) So there is a risk that by leaving it on, unused, for extended periods of time can damage it.

I like my Canons that can be programmed to power on and off automatically, so I don't have to worry about that nonsense anymore.

No, you are right, the printer should not care. The issue is not head cleaning but "ink charging." Ink charging occurs every time this particular printer series is turned on, the printer will conduct a head cleaning whenever it feels like it is necessary. The display says either head cleaning or ink charging, it's considered a different process. For this particular series I am nearly 100% certain that the head is covered when idle because when you turn off the printer the head does not move, the machine simply shuts off with no mechanical hoopla.

As I said though of the 3 Epsons I have owned / still own the 740, r320m, and c120 they all have their eccentricities. One thing I forgot to mention with the 740 was that its manual explicitly said never to leave it on for long periods of time (I think it said overnight) because there were little heaters near the heads that could overheat and damage the printer. The R320 manual says to leave it on. The C120 is mediocre so I never read the manual and I don't care.

I have heard just as many crappy stories about Epsons as I have Canons over the years and while neither is as god forsaken as HP or gasp, Lexmark (got one of those free w. an iMac ages ago... what a piece!), neither is perfect. The R320 will print an amazing photo and it prints on CDs and DVDs but its text output is slow and not particularly sharp. The 740 actually had nicer text output and was only slightly slower but its ink was not color fast so photos were out. the C120 is fast but its color accuracy is a joke though text looks pretty good.

Ultimate solution in my book: Nice, reasonably priced photo inkjet, nice b&w laser - I honestly have yet to find an inkjet or a laser that does both well.

[OreoCookie]

There is a difference between anecdotal evidence and known problems. While no printer in the world is perfect and `some will fail,' clogging is a known problem uniquely associated to Epson printers. A problem that neither HP nor Canon have (for different reasons, with most HPs, you change the print head with the ink tank). Of course, Epson is aware of this and has taken measures to prevent this -- and one of them is to make sure there is always (wet) ink in the print head.

To my knowledge, no similar problem exists with other printer manufacturers across models and generations.

[Veltliner]

Originally Posted by EndlessMac 

I'm not saying you are accusing me, but I want to make it clear that I'm not one of those people. I fully admit Epson have their problems but this thread is coming across as a Canon fanboy and Epson bashing discussion.

All of the different brands have their good and bad points. The Canon printer I owned had problems my Epson doesn't so for me it was a good experience when I switched.

And for the record I prefer HP printers for laser printing.

There was a misunderstanding. Nothing was directed at you.

When I said "some people get mad when you say something against an Epson" it's about the same as some people get mad if you recommend using a Mac.

So, quite the opposite, I'm all against any brand loyalty, including to the Apple brand. If something stinks, it's best to admit to the fact instead of putting up an act of a pleasant nose experience.

The higher end Epsons are great printers, but you need to use them regularly. The clogging problem is a fact.

You can as well go with an HP and a Canon high end printer. The character of the print will be a bit different. To get best quality, you need to get familiar with your printer and know its eccentricities. It's like with cameras, editing software - there is no one best for all people-solution.

I hope this clears the sky of thunderstorms.