Customer Reviews
Have to see it to believe it 
2002-04-11
After working in a wet darkroom for the last fifteen years, I couldn't believe that a digital printer could do better. I was wrong. The prints are beautiful. They are easier to correct that in a conventional darkroom, and I no longer have to turn down jobs for only one or two prints. (When you put $50.00 worth of chemicals into a proccessor, you want to do more than that.)It is just a little slow compared to my Epson 870, or tne Canon S800. But the quality is unreal. I just wish I hadn't waited so long to buy it. But I'm glad I finally did. And now that I have the Canon EOS-1D, I gave away my darkroom. Just dont need it anymore.And my friends that laughed at digital just a little while ago are now going digital. I haven't had a wedding couple dissapointed with the photos yet, and that is what counts.
Fantastic Photo Printer 2002-01-12
I just purchased this Epson Photo 2000P and have to say that the quality is fabulous. I have to say that I do have the latest Nikon Coolpix 5000 (5 Megapixel) camera which I am sure also leads to great quality.
I have had several HP Photo printers and was very pleased with them. But the difference between this printer, (which is expensive but well worth it) and the HP's is like comparing a Rolls Royce to a basic car. The basic car will do the job but won't provide the exquisite quality. The HP will print smaller prints very well. The Epson 2000P truly makes brilliant large prints
This is a printer for someone who really wants fantastic high quality prints with beautiful detail. Ideally you will also want a high end camera to ultimately get the incredible prints.
Not a printer for professionals 
2001-12-13
The 2000P has far too noticeable a dot pattern on all the medias available. Watercolor paper prints the best, because it isn't as noticeable. But, for professional photographers and artists, the prints are too dotty and digital to make it into a quality exhibition, display, or any collection as Epson would have it. Phoning customer service and requesting a return only returned their boasts about archival quality. If it ain't broken, no returns, and how 'bout that archival quality. So what? If a print is sub-standard, who cares if it lasts for 160 years? This is not a true photographic quality printer. For that, stick to traditional photographic techniques. Additionally, the greenish cast is no joke, and ICC profiles don't work well at all. Stylus RIP software for Postscript printing only allows for EPS files to print. And it prints the file at one-half the resolution, so now the RIP files look like 360 dpi output. No good again for signage, etc. from Quark or Pagemaker. Inquiring with Epson about the RIP issues got back comments about perceived color vs. real color, and no comments about the resolution problems. Is a 1280 better? At least it would be cheaper. The 2000P burns through color cartridges.
Not a printer for professionals 2001-12-12
The 2000P has far too noticeable a dot pattern on all the medias available. Watercolor paper prints the best, because it isn't as noticeable. But, for professional photographers and artists, the prints are too dotty and digital to make it into a quality exhibition, display, or any collection as Epson would have it. Phoning customer service and requesting a return only returned their boasts about archival quality. If it ain't broken, no returns, and how 'bout that archival quality. So what? If a print is sub-standard, who cares if it lasts for 160 years? This is not a true photographic quality printer. For that, stick to traditional photographic techniques. Additionally, the greenish cast is no joke, and ICC profiles don't work well at all. Stylus RIP software for Postscript printing only allows for EPS files to print. And it prints the file at one-half the resolution, so now the RIP files look like 360 dpi output. No good again for signage, etc. from Quark or Pagemaker. Inquiring with Epson about the RIP issues got back comments about perceived color vs. real color, and no comments about the resolution problems. Is a 1280 better? At least it would be cheaper. The 2000P burns through color cartridges.
Very happy with the 2000P 2001-12-09
I'm not a professional photographer, but I am a serious scrapbooker and photo enthusiast. I bought this printer for its archival ink and large format, and I'm very happy with the prints I'm getting. It is somewhat sensitive to matching the paper setting with the paper, but once you get the right combination you get fabulous prints reliably. I've used it a lot lately in printing pictures from a 4-week trip to Europe, and it does seem to go through color cartridges quickly but the quality is worth it.
Well, seven years later (2007). . . . 2007-08-12
Actually, I bought this printer in 2002, and so it has only been five years for me. This is still (2007) a fine printer. There are two claims made by one or two reviewers: (1) that resolution is so poor that you can see the dots; (2) that the color is different if viewed under different lighting.
First of all, if the prints show visible dots, you are doing something wrong. This prints are as smooth as silk if the files are big enough--but you have to print at the correct settings. Second, of course there is going to be a difference in color if viewed under different lighting condition. That is the nature of pigments. That is why photos made inside without a flash often have a "tungsten cast." Our eyes can correct for that, of course, but the printer cannot. It can only print what we send it.
As for the "green cast" issue, I solved that accidentally a long time ago: simply load your black and white files but PRINT IN COLOR. For some reason you will get neutral black and white pictures with no color cast. I have no idea why, but it works. Print it as "Black and White" on the settings and you will get the color cast. I have seen no one else notice this, but it is absolutely true, and I assume that there is some glitch in the software somewhere that is responsible for this anomaly.
I doubt that anyone is still reading about this printer these many years later, but I looked at some prints today and realized that we have not really come so far from where this printer was in 2000--and how much more resolution can the eye detect? I am thus very skeptical of resolution claims made for more modern printers. I do not doubt that luminescence can be higher, and that the range of tones has improved (not to mention the color gamut), but, unless prints are help up side by side, one will not notice the difference. I am going to have to try to load some of today's huge digital files and see what happens. One thing is certain: the resolution will not decrease.
NOTHING BETTER 2002-12-14
There simply is no better ink-jet printer for photos at any price.Simply print a Black and White photo on Epson premium paper at high res. and you too will be a believer.
Yes, you have to use good paper, and you must calibrate and profile the printer to your scanner and monitor.
There are other brillant color printers and other borderless or wide format printers, but if you are a photographer of any skill level, you know how important shadows and shades of gray are to contrast values. This is the printer.
Try one, hold the print up to the light and try to see the droplets of ink.Follow the rules and you won't be disappointed. Don't like rules...
Always Epson 2002-10-15
I have always bought Epson printers, they have always been reliable, with sharp colourful outputs, cartridges and papers have always been at affordable prices. I am in the graphics industry and i've had my Epson Stylus photo 2000P for about a year and i still love it.
People have always asked me where I get my printing done:) I always say "I printed it at home" with a big smile on my face because I know I'm saving money
This printer can do composites as well as postscript printing using a ripper. This printer is great for anyone doing professional desktop publishing of any kind. I also recommend purchasing Epson StylusRIP software for doing any postscript work or vector graphics (printers cannot print PS or vectors without a RIP and not all printers can understand RIP, but this one does so well!). The printer works on USB and the ripper works on parallel so switching between them is so easy. I also noticed this printer doesn't run out of ink as fast as others and with the extra colour it gives very realistic outputs.
The only precaution is that you MUST use Epson paper with it. Epson has a different paper technology and using other papers with this printer tends to make the inks run.
Epson Stylus Photo 2000P Inkjet Printer 2002-08-21
Like new.Perfect shape and only 5 months old. All Epson papers work on with this printer. You can print from 8X10 to 13"X19" size prints.The color is spot on and the printer itself is very easy to use from turning it on to changing inks. I am selling it because I am a professional photographer that shoots and prints in black and white primarily and I have found a new black and white printer that was made exclusively for black and white printing only. I can also ship it in its original box.
beware 
2002-05-06
The 2000p which I own has been replaced three times. It is capable of producing absolutely beautiful pictures. However, it's software is totally unreliable causing the machine to cease functioning repeatedly in partial print mode. The software has been tweaked with advanced technical support. All of this to no avail. I never know when it will print or not. Then when it does, the consistency of the picture is again not reliable. This is one to avoid. CAVEAT EMPTOR.
