Epson Stylus Photo 2000P

Well, first of all I am an amateur digital photog, so bear that in mind. I use an HP850 4 megapixel camera for my shots. I bought this printer (refurd on Ebay) because I wanted to print larger than 8.5x11 prints. Mostly I print for my own satisfaction, but also for gifts for others. I have been using an Epson Photo 870 for the last couple years. I really liked the prints from the 870. But I made a comparison print using same file and paper using the 2000p. WOW! Much more accurate color to on-screen photo. I have not tried any of the pro-level Epson papers yet. But I am anxious now to get some new pics to print.

Great on-screen to print color accuracy. Very easy installation.

VERY slow text printing. Took about 30 seconds to print test page when I installed it.

Epson Photo 870

Great printer, not very durable, wait for the 2100. This is the third Epson photo printer that I have had die on me, the previous being a 700 and a 1200. The construction is not professional level. I believe anyone that needed precise color matching for things like product shots or skin tones had better be a true techie, because this thing is hard to control. Most of my stuff is landscapes, and I am not concerned with matching the slide or negative precisely, I just want a picture that looks good. I spend about $35 for an 11x14 Ilfochrome from a custom lab and about $70 for a 16x20. This printer gives something in between in size, and a print I can frame and have confidence that it will not fade for awhile, and I am not satisfied that any other ink jet does this. From the price perspective, even with this thing going dumpster bait after only a year and a half I have still saved money, and gotten a lot more control over the final result. The 2100 supposedly fixes some of the problems of the 2000, and will cost about the same, so if archival (or whatever passes for that in color these days) is a priority, wait a month or two and buy the 2100. I believe that the metamarism (sp?) is a legitimate problem, but I have not had a problem with it in my work and it goes with the pigment-based, somewhat archival territory. Get another printer for plain paper text. This is a graphics printer, and does text on plain paper poorly, slow, and expensively. A DUST COVER IS NOT AN OPTION IF THE PRINTER IS TO LIVE IN A DUSTY ENVIRONMENT OR ONE INHABITED BY ANIMALS THAT SHED. ALL EPSON PRINTERS THAT I HAVE USED ARE VERY SENSITIVE TO DUST AND ANIMAL HAIR.

- Good looking, fairly large prints that can be framed and hung with some confidence.

- Dead slow. Even tech support could not believe how long it took to print a test page. - I wouldn't mind something a bit more rugged for $800. - Tricky to control compared with Epson's dye-based photo printers.

Epson 700 Photo, Epson 1200 Photo, Epson 1270 Photo.

I have been using this printer for coming up on one year now. Although I have not done extensive comparisons I have been very happy with the output and gotten many "WOW" comments. On archival matte paper, the printer is totally awesome! I have not found any issues with the intensity of the reds. Nearly all the pictures I have printed are from my coolpix 990 camera which it goes very well with as far as color balance (these prosumer digcams are a little on the saturated side so that could be a factor). There is an issue with the metamerism (sp?) but I have not found it seriously detracting on the archival matte paper. I don''t think the semigloss prints are nearly as good as the matte ones, it seems like there is more metamerism apparent on the semigloss paper along with the problem of the non-printing on the completely saturated areas looking funny. I have not done much to correct the color balance; its great for me with the defaults on the matte paper.

Wonderful artistic photos on archival matte paper! This printer is an artistic vehicle you can go places with. No fading like my stylus photo EX (which was unbelievably bad in that department and why I bought this printer)

Slow. Plan on starting your jobs, making sure enough paper is loaded, and coming back after dinner. Semigloss printing is not fully satisfactory, I only use it for printing informal snapshots on the roll paper. Chew up $$ on supplies (not horrible but it adds up). Graininess is a bit worse than dye subs

epson stylus photo ex

The printer sucks, I think it's evil; you get seduced by the samples you see in the stores, then your printer finaly arrives and you plug it in and go to work and your prints are amazing, you go to bed thinking about it all night, you can't wait until morning to see them again and start showing them to clients; morning comes and every things GREEN and nobody wants to buy from me! It turns out Epson new about this problem all along but after speeking to Two different Epson reps at two different Comp USA's and a sales person at Western Photo and of course the sales person at Page Computers who I purchased it from, no mention of this metamerism problem was ever made but infact after telling them how I planned on using it thay all recomended this printer to me. If you want to be truly dissapointed, this is the perfect printer for you.
Value Rating: 0 Stars / Overall Rating: 0 Stars

With archival matte you can produce results arguably better than lab photos but only if not viewed in daylight.

Metamerism! When people see the green thay want their money back if you sell your art! It's the printer from hell!

Agfa, HP and three other Epson printers.

I hope I get my money back. Wish me luck.

I have a 1270 but was concerned with longevity of prints( especially if sold). The 2000p does an excellent job. The colors are a little more realistic and less velvia like compared to the epson 1270. I have had prints made in a lab with the fuji frontier. Many of the prints made with the 2000p seem to have better color saturation.

*Archival Prints
*Excellent Detail
*Variety of paper choice

*Cost of consumables

*Epson 1270

*excellent tech support