Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Once again Alzieu blows a printer review

Tags:
  • Printers
  • Reviews
  • Peripherals
  • Product
Last response: in Computer Peripherals
Share
March 7, 2002 2:05:30 PM

I need to just stop reading the printer reviews. This last one is even worse than the general purpose review. Obviously he is strongly biased towards Canon printers. No imperical data. What does he base his quality scores on. Before anyone uses this information to base a printer buying decision, I would suggest you check other sources or reviews.

By the way, have any of you Epson owners ever needed to replace the print head?

More about : alzieu blows printer review

March 7, 2002 2:37:29 PM

Quote:
By the way, have any of you Epson owners ever needed to replace the print head?


Nope, I've had my Color Stylus 600 for about 3 years. Only minimal printing, though.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
Don't step in the sarcasm!
Anonymous
March 7, 2002 4:28:41 PM

Pretty disapointing review with a clear Canon bias. I have an Epson Stylus Photo 870 for a while now (approx 2years). I had to clean the print head maybee 4-5 times and it still prints like new.
Also, how can you compare price per page, without taking into account the cost of the paper. In order to get the best results you will need special paper, most likely from the printer manufacturer. So this factor is as important is the ink cost. Also get your math right the cost for the HP is not twice as high but 50% higher.
March 7, 2002 4:47:34 PM

And another thing. Why did he compare it the Epson 1280. Why not the 785 or the 820? Because both are under $150 and make the price on the $400 + Canon models look rediculous!

BTW the print head (block) on the Canon S800 and the BJC 8200 are both $85.99 from Canon. DAMN! For that much I'll buy an new Epson 820 and get new Ink Cartridges at the same time!
March 7, 2002 5:32:01 PM

well Epsons dont sell replacement print heads, so you would have to buy a new printer anyway :wink:

my 2 rubles.
March 7, 2002 5:35:46 PM

I was also disapointed about the quality section. It isn't even mentioned that the quality can only be measured by looking at prints of the same image side by side.

Also, I didn't notice any mention of pigmented inks. Even if the quality is great at print time the prints will fade quickly using dye based systems.

I have used several Epson's and found them very reliable. (I question the PPM times as well but maybe I'm just picky)

<b><font color=red>Jwaggone</font color=red></b>
Anonymous
March 11, 2002 9:52:36 AM

Hello Everybody,

"he is strongly biased towards Canon printers"
Do you really think that ? I hope not. Why should I prefer a printer with a higher cost per page if the quality is the same or even less good ?
My opinion is that the S520, the S750, the S820, the S900 et the S9000 are excellents printers. I like less the S200 and S300 and I hate the S100, that is the worst printer of the market.
My trouble is that you say I'm "biased towards Canon printers" just because you prefer the Epson's models. Isn't it a little short ? personnaly, I don't have any problem with them.

"have any of you Epson owners ever needed to replace the print head?"
Do you mean there's no risk to change these heads ? If so, you're wrong. Tell about it to people that don't use their printers as often as you. I was a big Epson's fan. I loved my Stylus 740. But now, you can find much better. And actually, I'm not writing that you're going to change these heads, but that this is a danger with this technologie. That is the same for Canon.

"I had to clean the print head maybee 4-5 times "
You had to do it yourself only 4-5 times but the printer does it automatically quite often, without asking anything. But don't worry, it quite the same for every printers.

"Why did he compare it the Epson 1280. Why not the 785 or the 820?"
Because the 1280's price is close to the one of the S900. If I want to compare the Stlys 785 and 820 with some Canon printers, it will be with the new S820. And you already know that the comments about the 1280's cost per page and quality are the same for the 785.

"It isn't even mentioned that the quality can only be measured by looking at prints of the same image side by side."
How do you think I do ? Exactly like that.

Vincent Alzieu
vincent@tomshardware.fr
Anonymous
March 12, 2002 7:51:23 AM

I forgot to tell one thing :
the printer I'm waiting for the most is a... Epson.
the one named PM-950C in Japan, the one using 7 colors instead of 6. This one may be the best one.

Vincent Alzieu
vincent@tomshardware.fr
March 12, 2002 1:50:50 PM

Vincent, you have to realize that we frequent THG because of the high level of quality in it's comparisons and benchmarking data. We expect this. Your comparison includes very little empirical data and a lot of what appears to be your opinion. You list the quality without supporting documentation. You used Canon paper which I'm sure the inks were specifically formulated to match. A more objective test would have been to use a completely different brand not designed for use with any of the printers. Or you could have used each lines recommended paper as you did in your generel purpose review. There is no data on how you determined per print cost. There is no data on the methodology used to determine print speed. You state that these are the best photo printers around at the moment, "as we have seen". Is this really a fair assumption based on a comparison against two other printers?

This is what we have come to expect from THG.
March 12, 2002 6:59:32 PM

will it have a photo yellow in it too?

what are the 7 colors?



my 2 rubles.
Anonymous
March 19, 2002 1:04:00 PM

Ruthless,
My opinion is based on several years of testing printers. Just in one year, I have tested 78 models. I think I can make me a quite good opinion about them.
Using aother paper than the one recommanded is fine, but not in a review where you want to have the best quality. Otherwise, I can also use differents inks, etc.
Print cost : try and guess how I do. By the way, the entire description is here :
http://www4.tomshardware.com/consumer/01q4/011212/inkje...
Print page : same comment. See the page before.

Vincent Alzieu
vincent@tomshardware.fr
March 19, 2002 3:47:33 PM

No, you missed the point. You used Canon recommended paper in all the printers. There is a significant difference in the composition of the inks between various printers. That's why Canon recommends Canon paper and HP recommends HP paper and so on.

As far as print cost is concerned, your initial charts do not support your conlusion chart. As a matter of fact, I have no idea how you determined cost per page.

example:

you state that the cost of a black cartridge in the Canon S500 is $5.50 and it has a cartridge life of 475 pages. Yet you say that its B&W per page cost is $.05 when the math clearly shows it to be $.01 per page. Even if its life is calculated on 5% coverage and B&W printing is at 10% as you stated, that would mean its cost per page would be $.02.

And your total cost for the printer in you conlusion is also miscalculated.

1500 B&W x .06 = $90
1500 clr x .08 = $120
cost of printer $149
Sum = $359 your article states $378

You know what, it doesn't matter. I've wasted enough time on this!

Lesson learned: Stick to CPU and Mainboard reviews.
Anonymous
March 21, 2002 1:07:59 PM

I've used Canon's paper with the Canon's printers.
I've used Epson's paper with the Epson's printers.
I've used HP's paper with the HP's printers.
I've used Tetenal's paper with the Lexmark's printers, as Lexmark wants.

Bye, bye.

Vincent Alzieu
vincent@tomshardware.fr
Anonymous
March 21, 2002 1:13:59 PM

Globe, it will be either a dark yellow or a second black. We've just learned that the european's version will only use a second black. But I don't know anything for the american version, that will come quite later.
There will be also some others Epson printers. But it's to early to talk about it...

Vincent Alzieu
vincent@tomshardware.fr
!