Epson 8550

[Anjin San]

Anybody have one of these (or the smaller format 8500)? We’ve been using a B&W laser printer for prefer…but wife wants a color printer and…ya know…happy wife and all that. Could get a cheaper 4 color inkjet but decided that a 6 color one with the ability to print images for the wall would be good. I like the ecotank idea because less ink cost…but a, somewhat concerned about nozzle clogs. We print every 10 days or so but occasionally it might be a month…is there any real issue with nozzle clogging that a clean cycle on copier paper doesn’t solve. The 8550 does 13x19 which is a nice size for hanging prints…and I’m leaning towards it as the extra cost of the deeicated photo printers with more ink colors doesn’t seem worth it. Figured I would see if anyone has experience with one.

Is there a good reason to go with one of the higher priced spread printers instead? Not a dedicated print hanger and all reviews I’ve seen say this is fine for a dual purpose printer and 13x19 is a decent size to hang…anything larger I would just use a commercial printer.

 

[Box Brownie]

I have the 8550

I bought it for these reasons:-

Eco tank inks
Review test report by Keith Cooper (north light images)
Max print size means I can split A3+ sheet for 2 off 12 x 8 inch prints as required.
To replace my old (sold for a few £'s) Canon TS8250 that drank ink.
To compliment our >12 years old HP mono laser.

I use a PC and installed Epson Print Layout (EPL) software, which Keith confirmed in his review, works with the printer even though Epson don't or didn't list it as compatible. NB there is Mac version available too

On Epson papers the colours look great
On non Epson papers I got custom profiles and again the prints IMO are darned good .

One aspect that was mentioned on Dpreview forum was that with some 3rd party papers some printers will leave a witness mark (some refer to it as "pizza wheel" marks). There seems to be no clear reason for which papers might exhibit it. Thickness, not proven. Surface softness possibly more relevent.

Oh and B&W prints, because it uses both Photo Black & Pigment Black are very good.......but from my testing the finish is prone to scuff marking if handled poorly.

HTH

 

[Whiskeyman]

Are you a Sam's Club member? They are currently on sale at $550 (8550) and $450 (8500) online at Sam's. I purchased my ET-8500 from them a while ago with free shipping due to my membership level.

I've got the ET-8500 as an "everyday" printer, and it does a very good job for most of my smaller printing needs. If I want to go more archival or wider than 13-inch, I use my SC-P900.

The ET uses dye inks and the P900 uses pigment inks, and while the P900 usually prints a better photograph, it is close. I have printed a couple of shots on metallic papers where I actually like the dye inks of the 8500/8550 better. If I had it to do over, I'd get the ET-8550 instead of the ET-8500 so that I'd have the dye ink option out to 13-inches wide, instead of just 8.5-inches wide.

There are a lot of reviews of the ET-8500/8550 online, and most are very complimentary of the line's photo printing quality.

Be careful, though... Once you start down this road, you may end up like me with a lot of photo paper boxes around the house. I've personally helped inflate Red River Papers worth substantially over the past eighteen months.

 

[Anjin San]

Thanks to both of you…I read the assorted reviews and it seems the best cost/benefit ratio for both image prints and whatever it is that my bride wants to print in color. The tanks vice cartridges is a big plus for me. I’m not a Sam’s Club member though…Costco for us but perhaps they have a deal as well…will have to go look.

 

[Whiskeyman]

Office Depot has the ET-8550 on sale online for a penny short of $600 US. (Other sources may have them on sale, too.) If you have an Office Depot near, you can order online and pick up at the store.

The lesser ink replacement cost of the ET- printers is worth every bit of the initial extra cost over cartridge ink printers in my eyes. My family has printed several reams of paper on our ET-8500, and would have likely gone through two, if not three cartridge replacements, to the tune of $150 or more with our previous printer.

I've read and heard some rumors (online) that it is about time for Epson to release a new photo printer in the ET series, which may, or may not, account for the sale prices, and cause some to wait to see what new comes along in the next months.

 

[Anjin San]

Office Depot has the ET-8550 on sale online for a penny short of $600 US. (Other sources may have them on sale, too.) If you have an Office Depot near, you can order online and pick up at the store.

The lesser ink replacement cost of the ET- printers is worth every bit of the initial extra cost over cartridge ink printers in my eyes. My family has printed several reams of paper on our ET-8500, and would have likely gone through two, if not three cartridge replacements, to the tune of $150 or more with our previous printer.

I've read and heard some rumors (online) that it is about time for Epson to release a new photo printer in the ET series, which may, or may not, account for the sale prices, and cause some to wait to see what new comes along in the next months.

I’m going to pick one up once I ge5 back from Africa next month.

 

[Anjin San]

I'm ordering one of these soon…but I seem to vaguely remember seeing a notice someplace that printing edge to edge resulted in a lot of ink on the rollers and then on subsequent prints. I was planning on printing edge to edge…anybody with one of these seen this issue? I'm guessing it isn't a big deal since Epson wouldn't likely build an edge to edge model that inked up the rollers…but who knows for sure.

 

[Box Brownie]

I'm ordering one of these soon…but I seem to vaguely remember seeing a notice someplace that printing edge to edge resulted in a lot of ink on the rollers and then on subsequent prints. I was planning on printing edge to edge…anybody with one of these seen this issue? I'm guessing it isn't a big deal since Epson wouldn't likely build an edge to edge model that inked up the rollers…but who knows for sure.

FWIW

Purely my view.......

I would not print edge to edge (borderless?) on any inkjet printer, with a possible caveat that high end printers perhaps have mitigation in place to scavenge the over sprayed ink in a reliable way.

AFAIK the likes of the ET-8550 (I have that printer ) even with a maintenance tank, when printing borderless will end up with ink in the (,non user replaceable) absorber pads.....none too sure about the overspray getting on the rollers? NB the maintenance tank AFAIK collects the ink used in charging the lines and cleaning cycles. It does not collect the overspray ink!

IMO if you wish to print borderless on a regular basis......you need to research which printers explicitly state borderless printing in the specs and also have mitigation technology (other than the aforementioned non user replaceable ink absorption pads) in place to collect the overspray inks. As I said above I surmise that is available only in printers costing in $1000's

 

[Anjin San]

AFAIK the likes of the ET-8550 (I have that printer ) even with a maintenance tank, when printing borderless will end up with ink in the (,non user replaceable) absorber pads.....none too sure about the overspray getting on the rollers? NB the maintenance tank AFAIK collects the ink used in charging the lines and cleaning cycles. It does not collect the overspray ink!

IMO if you wish to print borderless on a regular basis......you need to research which printers explicitly state borderless printing in the specs and also have mitigation technology (other than the aforementioned non user replaceable ink absorption pads) in place to collect the overspray inks. As I said above I surmise that is available only in printers costing in $1000's

Thanks…I probably won't print borderless much anyway…and given my needs and wants the very expensive printers aren't on the possible list anyway. It might have been the absorber pads I was referring to anyway…I saw that in several comments from owners in other places so depending on the knowledge of the posters and my remembering it could easily have been the pads and not the rollers…the pads make mores sense anyway I think.