Epson 4880 vs. Canon vs. HP vs. ??? Printer?

Question:In order to print decent-looking photographs on location, I've come to the inescapable conclusion that I'm going to need to purchase a fairly sturdy inkjet printer in the $1000-2000 price range. Weight of the printer isn't so big a concern -- that's what hand trucks are for. My main concerns are:

* Sturdiness/Ease of transport -- can I move the printer and expect to be able to immediately set it up and use it on location?
* Quality of images -- is its print quality what one would expect from a $2000 investment?
* Cost of consumables -- obviously lower is better. Epson cartridges appear to have the lowest cost/ml, but there are plenty of other factors that contribute to this cost.

The Epson 4880 seems to be the front-runner. But I'm basing this on what I'm seeing on websites, not from real world experience. Supporting/contrasting viewpoints would be sincerely appreciated!

TIA,
Bob

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: In order to print decent-looking photographs on location, I've come to the inescapable conclusion that I'm going to need to purchase a fairly sturdy inkjet printer in the $1000-2000 price range. Weight of the printer isn't so big a concern -- that's what hand trucks are for. My main concerns are:

* Sturdiness/Ease of transport -- can I move the printer and expect to be able to immediately set it up and use it on location?
* Quality of images -- is its print quality what one would expect from a $2000 investment?
* Cost of consumables -- obviously lower is better. Epson cartridges appear to have the lowest cost/ml, but there are plenty of other factors that contribute to this cost.

The Epson 4880 seems to be the front-runner. But I'm basing this on what I'm seeing on websites, not from real world experience. Supporting/contrasting viewpoints would be sincerely appreciated!

TIA,
Bob

Epson, hands down...
It is still the best printer as it has greater better print media choices and better stabilization. It's convenient and has a relatively small "footprint." You can fine tune the results to meet your art and quality standards by creating a print profile that can be repeated time and time again.

Now the bad news...
Cost per print is still way out of line to what you can get done at a high quality print house. Why? Because they pay for all the mistakes, repairs and goofs. Unless you are doing an enormous volume, you will find it difficult to justify the $2000 investment plus the time it will take to keep everything normalized.

I haven't bought any of the newer models recently, but I CAN vouch for the durability and reliability of the Epson products.

I currently have - and still use! - two ancient Epsons: a 1270 and a Photo2000P. They've been through hell and just keep on ticking - and producing great prints.

Also, most of the pros I know use Epson too.

So ... the best advice I can offer is this: Go Epson!

I think Epson has the edge though Canon are getting pretty good these days. HP is a non starter in my book.

Inkjet printers don't like to be moved as they can get ink into the capillary 'breather' tubes within the cartridge.

The Epson is definately cheaper to run.

Chris

if you are printing photos on location, the epson 4880 is not going to do it. it takes roughly 2-6 minutes for one photo. you should probably go for a sony printer, if you look on their website they have laser printers that use ribbon as ink, and they print photos in abt 7 seconds at 5x7. ink jets won't do it... they are too slow