What is the difference between 820 and 890??
Hi. I am just getting used to my Coolscan IV, and would like to start printing with an Epson printer. Before I plunk down the cash, what is the major difference between these two? Do they both produce the same quality output? Would I be better served to save some money and go with the 820, or does the 890 justify the extra cost. To give a little background, all I want to do is print up to 8x10. I plan on picking my best images (colour and black and white), and desire to produce a fine quality print. Archival quality is not a primary concern at this point, but overall print quality is the #1 concern. I just don't want to spend more money than I really need to at this point. Perhaps I can justify it in the future, but not right now. Thanks for any advice / input. ciao.
#1. "RE: What is the difference between 820 and 890??" | In response to Reply # 0Bob_H Nikonian since 09th Feb 2002Sat 06-Jul-02 09:13 PM
I have the 890 and am very pleased with it. I have been refilling the cartridges for about six months now and have noticed no drop in quality at all.
A friend of mine bought the 820. I printed out a couple of images and the quality of the printouts seemed fine. I was shocked by how much noise it made. As well it is significantly slower than the 890. An additional consideration might be the refillability of the cartridges. The company that I get my inks from isn't able to refill the color cartridge for the 820 at this time but should be able to in the near future.
That being said the quality of prints from the 820 seems to be there and the price is very attractive compared to the 890.
That's all I know about the two of them. Hope it helps.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#2. "RE: What is the difference between 820 and 890??" | In response to Reply # 0bgelfand Registered since 08th Feb 2002Fri 12-Jul-02 02:56 PM
Here is a pointer to the Epson site. They have a complete discription of both printers that you might wish to compare.
#3. "Same print engine..." | In response to Reply # 0RRowlett Charter MemberFri 12-Jul-02 04:28 PM
The major difference between the 820 and 890 is that the 820 does not have the capability to handle roll paper, has smaller print buffer memory, and comes bundled with different (less?) software. If you are not planning on printing 4x6" photos on roll paper (the cheapest way to do 4x6 prints in mass) then the 820 is likely to serve you as well as the 890. I suspect somehow the 890 is more solidly built than the 820, but I have absolutely no real knowledge of this. At any rate, you could buy several 820s for the price of one 890. I used to own an 870 (the 890 precursor) and it was a solid performer. I used the roll paper option a lot.