Customer Reviews
Never had drama-free printing 
2008-11-11
I find it very unfortunate to have to write this review. I own both the Epson R1800 and R2400. As a professional, working photographer, I gave thought to buying the 4800.
I will never buy an Epson printer again.
First, I have never had drama-free printing. All I was trying to do with either printer was get a 20 image portfolio completed. Neither machine was able to get through the job without either needing an ink change, have the heads realigned or fail to communicate with the IEEE port. So, the workflow becomes interrupted and, by the time you figure out what happened, you're way behind and wondering where you left off.
The R1800 has created huge black streaks with larger format papers. It's useless for larger prints.
After owning the R2400 for about 16 months, it just developed a fatal flaw with horizontal lines which are not correctable by head realignment nor using the think paper command (a sub dialogue in the maintenance menu).
The R1800 developed a blue shift that is uncorrectable.
Notably, these machines have relatively little use, because it was impossible to get a workflow going with them anyway.
I contacted Epson regarding where I could get the machines repaired. I never heard back. Latest estimate from a private shop is a total of $500+ to get the machines functioning again.
What a shame.
The best printer yet 
2008-09-20
Epson Stylus R2400 Photo Printer
I replaced an older Epson Stylus with this R2400 Large Format unit after countless occasions of the inks clogging the print heads. I am happy to say I have not experienced this recurrance even one time with the R2400, so I'm a happy camper.
I use the printer to create bird photo greeting cards so the archival ink is a must. The R2400 supports glossy, matte, luster, fine art or posterboard prints in clear, consice colors. Printing is fast, and the 8-color ink set seems to outlast previous cartridges plus having the advantage of replacing a single color. It is also superior for black and white art prints with its Advanced Black-and-White Photo Mode, and it also allows use of border-free 13" x 44" roll paper.
It's a perfect addition to the digital photo studio.
Unreliable 
2008-08-27
On a good day, this printer can produce brilliant prints with excellent image quality.
On a bad day, plan to spend HOURS and LOTS of ink dealing with clogged heads, paper feed problems, and driver issues.
Image quality is 5 stars, reliability is 1 star.
ZERO points for EPSON customer service 
2008-08-26
I bought this printer in late 2007. The original printer printed too darkly. Epson sent a "rebuilt" printer which didn't turn on. I send the rebuilt printer back in May.Epson promised they would send another replacement as soon as the received the "rebuilt" printer. By mid June, Epson made me send the FEDEX tracking receipt to prove I send the "rebuilt" printer. Epson found that they had indeed received the "rebuilt" printer.
They send me a new printer at the end of June. At which point I send them the original printer which printed too darkly.
My credit card was charge $900.99 by Epson on August 03, 2008. Epson claimed they had no record of receiving the printer. I just had to send them the tracking receipt for both returns. they are claiming AGAIN to have no record of the printer I sent back in MAY!!!
Epson has the worst customer service that I have ever encountered!!!!
I hope you like doing nozzle cleaning routines and buying ink 2008-08-17
This printer has pretty great color and makes very nice black and whites. But having to swap matte/glossy into the same slot in the print head is a ridiculous waste of time, energy, not to mention ink, as it has to run several cleaning routines across every single color in order to prime just that one head.
And that's this printer's major problem. I run quite a few pages through it, but unless I print a few every single week, it gums up and then needs dozens of cleaning routines to get it back to ship shape. This wastes hundreds of dollars worth of ink every year. It's ridiculous that this thing can't stay unclogged better than that. I ran the drain tubes to a jar so I can quantify just how much ink it's wasting, and I empty that 125ml jar when it's full at least 3x per year. I run about 250 ml of ink of each color per year, so there's your math: 2000 ml of ink per year, 375ml of ink wasted via cleaning routines, for an astounding 18.8% waste.
Also, the printer is a few years old, but the build has never been good. Cheap plastic, poorly joined. Nowadays, panels flop open on their own (bad latches and the print head's own motion is violent enough to pop them) which causes mechanical problems and interference with the print head.
I love the images, but I will never get another Epson inkjet again. Canon, here we come.
Perfect for home photo studio 2008-07-17
Epson Stylus Photo R2400 Ink Jet Printer (C11C603011)
Epson Stylus R2400 2008-07-10
This is a fantastic printer! The image quality is fantastic and the archival inks are great. I was worried when I saw how little the ink cartridges were, but I have printed some large projects and haven't had to replace them yet. I have owned this since Feb or March of 2008.
Make sure you have a sturdy table or surface to put this on so it doesn't shake or move while printing.
I researched several wide format printers, and after speaking with some friends and others in the print industry, Epson was recommended overall more than any other brand, and this printer was in the top running for wide format printers- with the exception of the professional models. I would recommend this to anyone.
An Ink Guzzler 2008-05-29
Besides being an ink guzzler, I find this printer to be quite picky and finicky. It's not the easiest machine to figure out. I think it's an engineering nightmare. Still can't match color quality of an HP.I'll stick with my Hewlett-Packards.
Very good but with problems 2008-05-28
My initial experience was good, but after a year and a half here is the sum of the current state of affairs. I truly like the color quality with excellent black and white. Just so you know, I am a big Epson fan. I will not mention the design irritations as, the gymnastics required when handling large or heaver paper, or that blue/green print areas often require a separate layer mask to enhance color saturation, or that some saturated reds found in nature are unprintable (out of gamut). After a year and have of service:
* Some panels will not close and must be taped
* Will occasionally start printing about 2 stops darker than normal
* When changing from Photo to Matt black system will indicate that the cartridge is empty when it is not
* Occasionally will not recognize / feed paper
* Printer profiles are a bit confusing to setup and configure.
As I mentioned, I am an Epson fan, but for $700 I expected fewer problems and better ease of use. I will probably try a different printer the next time. Regards
Simply Amazing, Bordering on Stunning 
2008-05-26
I purchased this printer as a second printer to use for dedicated photo usage.
My first printer is a nice color laser printer which is very good for its niche and very nice workhorse, but my experience as a photographer prior to the digital age has always left me disappointed with its use as a photo machine. I purchased the Epson R2400 specifically for photographic production. I was looking for print size (the R2400 prints up to 13" wide by 44" long), pigment inks for archival longetivity, and deep, accurate reproduction of both color and B&W photography.
Ok, so far, so good. The printer arrived and was installed and running the same day. (I had pre-ordered a USB 2.0 cable to go with it, and it arrived the day before the printer.) The printer installed exactly as the rapid install guide illustrated. It installed quickly and easily, very smoothly and with no hiccups. I literally spent more time running the cable (The printer is located about 7 feet from the computer and I had to go behind some furniture up against a wall.) than I did installing the actual printer. In fact, I think I took more time taking SHIPPING TAPE off the printer than I did installing it!
The prints were an initial (slight) disappointment. However, this was due more to my impatience than any fault with the printer. My disappointment was because it came out of the printer looking very much like ink-jet prints I have seen before on glossy paper. The ink comes out dry enough to immediately touch without getting ink on your fingers or messing up the photo, but it IS susceptible to fingerprints getting on the image.
However, apparently the pigments on these prints "harden" over the subsequent few hours because the next day I was pleasantly surprised to find nice, smooth, shiny images that were very difficult to tell from actual photographic process prints. The main difference I find between photographic prints and the Epson's is that photographic glossy prints are a little more shiny. However, I think that this is actually a benefit. You get the sharpness of a glossy image, but with a little less glare than a traditional photo-process glossy.
Furthermore, looking at the Epson's prints under a 10X jeweler's loupe, I didn't see the "pixellation" I had come to expect from digital prints. In fact, it looks identical to the "grain" of photographic process prints.
Prior to running any of the ICC codes that were available as a free download from the Epson site, photos came out of the printer with very good color. Specifically, in an 8X10 print, a very colorful patterned tie I was wearing in a family photo (taken outdoors with the Panasonic DMC-FZ30 at 8 MP, standard outdoor color profile) compared very well (although not perfectly) with the actual tie itself. (The photo was taken and the judging was done, both in full sunlight.) I can't wait to have the time to start using the ICC profiles to see if and how much the color improves over this great start!
Ink usage may be an issue. I was talked out of the Epson 3800 by the salesman on the phone (Not to mention my wife had a price issue!) The salesmen mentioned that the ink cartridges are so large and the ink is only recommended for 6 months after you pop it into the printer. This means that unless you push a LOT of prints through, with the 3800 you will wind up throwing away a significant portion of the cheaper pigment inks.(although they do share the same Ultrachrome K3 pigment inks) This means that if you waste the 3800's larger volume, it can still be cheaper to run the R2400's smaller and (by volume) more expensive ink cartridges.
Personally on the first day, I ran through most of a pack of 100 glossy 4X6's and several of the sample pages that were packaged with the printer. (It ships with several examples of both glossy and matte 8.5 X 11" photo paper pages--Nice touch, Epson!) After this, the ink was listed as visibly diminished by the printer's pop-up window that appears at every print. This window helps you constantly monitor ink usage to help you avoid running out of ink halfway through a large print. In fact, one cartridge shows only 75% full now. My main worry with this printer now is that perhaps the 3800's larger ink cartridges would have been justified. Only time will tell.
One huge disadvantage with this R2400, supposedly the highest end home-user version of Epon's Ultrachrome K3 pigment process, is that you have to manually swap the Matte Black with the Photo Black (for glossy work) every time you want to go from glossy to matte or back again. Not such a big deal until you realize that every switch wastes ink. A call to tech support gave an estimate of 5% of total cartridge volume waste with every swap. (Ouch! Epson--PLEASE fix that!!!) It is this "feature" which dropped the R2400 down to 4 stars. The print quality is 5 star IMO, all the way. Incidentally, the 3800 installs both photo and matte ink simultaneously and swaps heads automatically, without ink wastage.
Time will tell, but I suspect that in the end, cartridge swapping ink wastage and ink cartridge size will give the edge to the 3800, at least with my volume usage. Your mileage may vary.
In conclusion, I wouldn't recommend this or ANY ink jet for a main, workhorse printer. That's what laser printers are for. However, if you can dedicate a second printer for photo purposes, I highly recommend this printer for most home users. The print quality is simply amazing, bordering on stunning.
(Note: I apologize for the length, but with a purchase item this complex and this expensive, I felt it would be worth it, even necessary. I tried to comprise the entire review of information I would want to know prior to such a purchase.)
