Anyone got experience with Epson Ecotank printers?

[Jørgen Ramskov]

I'm in need of a printer and so is my brother. We don't need to print absolute high quality, critical photos - if we should need that, we will order it at a professional print shop. This is for the random shot of the kid to hang on the fridge or the concert tickets we have to print or . Basically just your everyday printer for "everything". We *hate* the throw-away mentality of most inkjet printers where the printer is super cheap and the ink price is crazy expensive. It's basically cheaper to buy a new printer when you run out of ink. That's starting to change though and I think Epson was first, introducing their line of "Ecotank" printers. 

Looking around, the Epson ET-2650 seems like a decent choice: https://www.epson.co.uk/products/printers/inkjet-printers/consumer/ecotank-et-2650

I wonder if anyone here has any experience with the Ecotank line of printers and perhaps even this one? It's not like there's that many sites doing printer reviews, but based on the reviews I've read (here's one: https://www.epson.co.uk/products/printers/inkjet-printers/consumer/ecotank-et-2650), it seems to be pretty decent.

[David H. Hartman]

Laser Printer, Color!

[pluton]

  The thing to check is how bad the 'light fade' is on prints made with the Ecotank ink.  It is pointless to make a casual print to put on the wall that is faded away in 2 years.

[Fanie]

I use one in the office and one at home.

They are very cost effective ito ink costing, but its not the fastest printers around, but then I dont print reams of paper a week.

I have not checked colour fastness on images as that is not my biggest concern, as for that I use my Epson 4800 printer.

But for general use I would buy it again any day.

They replaced my Samsung color lazer printers which cost a fortune in toners to run.

[Jørgen Ramskov]

Laser Printer, Color!

Considered, but from what I've read, inkjet is still vastly superior when it comes to printing photos? Some years ago, toner for color lasers where pretty expensive?

[Jørgen Ramskov]

  The thing to check is how bad the 'light fade' is on prints made with the Ecotank ink.  It is pointless to make a casual print to put on the wall that is faded away in 2 years.

Not a problem in this case as I'd either just print a new copy or order a professional print.

[Jørgen Ramskov]

I use one in the office and one at home.

They are very cost effective ito ink costing, but its not the fastest printers around, but then I dont print reams of paper a week.

I have not checked colour fastness on images as that is not my biggest concern, as for that I use my Epson 4800 printer.

But for general use I would buy it again any day.

They replaced my Samsung color lazer printers which cost a fortune in toners to run.

sounds good, for how long have you owned the ecotank printers and what model?

[Fanie]

sounds good, for how long have you owned the ecotank printers and what model?

I have the Epson L355 series for two year now, and I had to do a head cleaning cycle once.

In the office I have a L365 model ( they look exactly the same ) for one year now, no problems.

[Jørgen Ramskov]

Thanks Fanie, Epson likely got a new customer

[Matthew Currie]

This certainly sounds interesting, and my HP printer has been acting up.  But I'm curious now about head cleaning.  I had an Epson printer back some years ago, and although it made nice prints when it worked, it used huge amounts of ink cleaning its heads, often requiring 6 or 8 cleaning cycles before it would make a print, and eventually clogging completely, with apparently no way to fix it other than sending it back to Epson.  I got an HP that replaced its jets with every ink change, and worked great, but it broke.  The next HP has been less satisfactory, doing cleaning cycles often when it starts, but at least it allows one to take the carriage out and wash it when it clogs.  Has Epson improved here?  I like the idea of not having to replace ink cartridges so often, but it's pointless if the printer stops working anyway.

I've heard of others in the past having similar problems with Epsons:  great if you do lots of photos, but terrible if you do only occasional ones.

[Fanie]

This certainly sounds interesting, and my HP printer has been acting up.  But I'm curious now about head cleaning.  I had an Epson printer back some years ago, and although it made nice prints when it worked, it used huge amounts of ink cleaning its heads, often requiring 6 or 8 cleaning cycles before it would make a print, and eventually clogging completely, with apparently no way to fix it other than sending it back to Epson.  I got an HP that replaced its jets with every ink change, and worked great, but it broke.  The next HP has been less satisfactory, doing cleaning cycles often when it starts, but at least it allows one to take the carriage out and wash it when it clogs.  Has Epson improved here?  I like the idea of not having to replace ink cartridges so often, but it's pointless if the printer stops working anyway.

I've heard of others in the past having similar problems with Epsons:  great if you do lots of photos, but terrible if you do only occasional ones.

My Epson home printer is two years old now, and I had to do a head cleaning once, the ink is just so cheap it does not hurt.

[Jørgen Ramskov]

I would also expect that to be something they have given some thought when designing it.

[Matthew Currie]

I would also expect that to be something they have given some thought when designing it.

So I would have thought, but real experience is always welcome.

[Jørgen Ramskov]

That's for sure. I'm not too worried based on the experience Fanie have.

[Lars Hansen]

Re clogging issues - it probably comes down to how often you use the printer. I have the Epson R3000 and used it regularly in the beginning - later it was left unused for longer periods and then the problems started .. not unexpected. I don't know if dye inks are less prone to clogging than pigment inks.

I now print a "unclog pattern" regularly to avoid additional issues but the print head still needs cleaning according to nozzle check.