Customer Reviews

Epson SP1280 Inkjet Printer

5 star:		(29)
4 star:		(12)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

My fiance and I are both art directors and we bought this printer to primarily update the work in our portfolio's. Both of us were somewhat skeptical about the level of quality we would receive, being used to having high quality proofs in our books. Well it's amazing, but this printer produces very high quality stuff. Frankly, it's not easy to differentiate between the Epson print and a C-print sitting in a portfolio.

It's not the speediest printer in the world, but then I didn't expect it to be. If your like me, you won't bother to print on the "fast" setting much, when you get used to the primo quality of the "quality" setting.

The other thing I like is that it's really not that big of a printer considering it will print 13x19 paper. I had expected it to be much larger, but it fits pretty nicely in the exact spot my laser printer occupied.

Also, despite being a photo printer, it does text pretty well. I haven't printed out that much text, but the things I have printed on the "quality" setting, have looked pretty good to me.

The output I get from my Canon S300 digital elph are also great. I have pics up in my office and everyone is shocked when I tell them it's not an actual photo, but an epson print.

Look Mom, no film!!!

The Epson 1280 prints so extremely well, it is difficult to believe. Slide in a piece of glossy photo paper (up to 13" wide), and watch (yea yea it takes a few minutes) a digital photograph become *real*. Paired with a Nikon 990 digital camera, this is pretty much a professional studio setup without the nifty dark-room.

The only drawback is the "shorter" lifespan of the prints (10-15 years) as opposed to the 200+ years of the Epson 2000P. The 2000P does not have the resolution of the 1280, or the more reasonable price point. I just figure that 10-15 years from now, I'll just click <Print> again. In the meantime, I'll enjoy a bunch of framed prints around my home and office of my *amazing* digital photos... at least, I think they're pretty good. ;-)

I have recently purchased the 1280 and have printed some 50 prints, mostly 8x10s (including borderless) but also a few 13x19s. The results are simply stunning! The blacks are true blacks which are hard to get from inkjets; on glossy paper, they're as good as a Cibachrome print. The reds jump off the page. The yellows are very good to excellent. The blues/cyans are a bit less stunning. I have printed mostly underwater images, and those with a lot of blue water in the background are not the best. However, I may need to play with them more since one particular image with more cyan-colored water than deep blue was very pleasing.
Most of my prints were made with the Epson Heavyweight Matte, which I used for the longer longevity (my prints haven't been around long enough to tell if the claims are really true for 20+ years). The results are very good to excellent. I've also used Epson's Borderless Premium Glossy Photo Paper (rated to only 10-15 years I believe)...the results equal photofinishing processes on glossy paper. These glossy prints are astounding coming off an inkjet print. Many of my friends and colleagues have been equally impressed. I've looked at other printers' output and checked a number of websites critiquing this and other printers. The bang for the buck is definitely worth it. It does take a little effort getting your monitor and printer working in synch, but the results are well worth the time. I was up and running with only about 10-12 test prints using different printer settings to sufficiently match my monitor.
Downsides are that the printer is relatively slow for a print (15-20 minutes for an 8x10); but then its a LOT faster and easier than a real home darkroom setup. You can start fussing with the next image while its printing out. See also my comments on the blues above, but they are definitely very acceptable--I haven't printed any blue-sky images yet. I do wish the printer could take up to 16" width paper (a standard, fairly large photo format), rather than only 13" wide paper. These minor criticisms aside, this is one outstanding printer for the money. Enjoy!

I replaced my Epson 1520 with the 1270 (now 1280). I did this to get higher quality prints that would last a long time without fading.

The prints have been nothing short of outstanding. The premium glossy paper is unbelievable in print quality. However, I prefer the heavy weight mat paper due to lower cost. Images are outstanding and the paper is much lower in cost. As for the printer, I have gone through five color ink cartridges with no problems. Sold black areas are black with no banding. This is one of my quality tests of a printer. Banding is unacceptable. The Epson passes with flying colors with an occasional need to use the automatic nozzle cleaning utility. I print 10 by 15 inch prints and measured an output of 22 prints per color cartridge, with about half of the back cartridge being used. This is more surface area of printing than my older model 1520 (which was also nice but not nearly as good).

Bottom line is that I see no way to improve this printer.

This printer really rocks. After I ruturned HP Photosmart P1200 pritner due to constant paper jam problems, I was looking for a quality photo printer to produce photo taken by my Fuji FinePix 4700 digital camera. Well, the wait is over. This printer prints unbelivable quality pictures. I printed 4x6 roll, 8x10 or you name it. No matther what the size of the paper format is, the print quality is the best I've ever seen. The setup took only 10 minutes. Just follow the manual carefully making sure not to load the driver through Windows rather do it via Epson install software. I've used for a month now and still haven't had a paper jam problem I was getting with HP photosmart printer. I highly recommend this printer. It is a little pricey but I think it's well worth it.

I bought this printer 1280 about a year ago for a profesional use, I sell prints of my artworks mostly 11x17s and 8x10... So I bought niagara ink flow system ... , it comes with separate ink bottles (6 of them) which sits next to the printer and bottles attachted to the cartriges with tubes. I did save about $2000 on inks within 4 months, I normally spend $1000 plus a month on regular epson cartridges I use 2 a day which gives me 45 to 50 11x14 prints. So this was a great relief only bad thing was that the quality declined, generation inks from mediastreet was no match the actual epson inks. If you going to use high wolume printing DO NOT BUY a printer that has no individual color cartridges it is simply pain to throw away the whole cartridge when you only run out of magenta. Wait for the Epson 2200 coming end of july 7 individual colors with 80 years lightfastness, perfect for photographers and artist who produce prints from their originals, I will be the first one inline to get one.From amazon.com if they sell it.

There is only one way to improve the already superb quality of prints you get from this outstanding printer. At maximum resolution and unidirectional printing, the quality is better than the C prints I was selling before. The printer has been very reliable. Even 310 gm/sq meter water color paper feeds flawlessly.

I am a professional gallery photographer, and I produce archival prints up to 13x19 on water color paper using the Generations Microbright archival pigment-based inks from Inkjetmall.com. Although Epson does not support this use of their printer, the colors, texture and brilliance of color are outstanding. With the Continuous Inking System, six four-ounce bottles sit on the desktop beside the printer, feeding ink to a permanent cartridge through little plastic tubes. This rivals the Iris printing system for smoothness and texture and detail and ability to print on quality art papers. If only it could print 16x20. . .

...I recently got in the market for a high-quality color printer after wanting a way to print out some of the photographs I've been doing. Most of my work is displayed on the web, but it's nice to have some large photos to put up around the house. I'm printing from 4x5" and 2x3" negatives, and I wanted something that would let me print put very large photos without spending 1k+ on a "wide carriage" printer.

My previous inkjet was a BJC-600, which is a total piece of junk compared to the 1280. Not much help when doing comparisons.

The Epson can easily be cajoled into doing a nice 26"x24" print without too much effort (two carefully-aligned 13" prints), and the image quality is stunning. Most of the images I've printed out so far have been B&W, and the prints are awesome at showing off all the tonality of the original negatives.

It's not all perfect, and I wish the printer manufacturers did a better job of emphasizing the drawbacks. The prints simply aren't going to be as permanent as a "real photo print"; the inks fade and color shift over time if they're exposed to air, and from what I can tell this fading takes place much more quickly than a standard B&W photo print would in the same environment. It's not the end of the world, but it is a drag.

The cost of printing is high, especially given the cost of ink cartridges and how quickly they're used up. Frankly, I almost think it would be cheaper to do 8"x10" or larger B&W photo prints (not considering labor), and the upfront costs for equipment would be cheaper as well. (Color's a different story, of course, and the 1280 would win hands-down.)

Another thing to keep in mind is that generating a high quality print isn't a click-n-go operation, and I doubt if it ever will be. You need to carefully consider the quality of the source material, and realize that what is printed won't match 100% what you see on the monitor without doing a lot of tweaking. Obviously this all depends on how nice you want the final product to appear... but it can take many hours to get the results you really want.

2880dpi is just a waste of ink as far as I can tell. It doesn't look any different than 1440, tho I haven't taken a microscope to the print (and if I have to do this to see a difference then it doesn't actually matter).

The only other problem I've run into was getting 13" borderless prints appears to be impossible without using their software. (I run Linux only, so I have no way to use their printer programs.) There always seems to be a .12" white border on either the left or right sides. It works fine on smaller sizes which is what most people will be using, but it's a little annoying that it doesn't easily work at 13" as well. Again, this is only a problem if not using their software, as supposedly it works fine with their print package.

Have I compared it to anyone else's products? Nope. I don't believe anyone else is selling a 13" printer of the same image quality that also accepts roll paper in the same price class. Having the ability to use roll paper opens up a lot of possibilities for larger prints and other odd sizes, so it's a big advantage for my purposes; that and the 13" carriage were the main reasons I chose the 1280.

I haven't tried it with text or any other uses, as I have a faster laser printer for that type of stuff. But for a photo printer, I think this is a very fine choice indeed. There are cheaper alternatives, and you'll want to think about your priorities before buying--I can't honestly say if the image quality is particularly better or worse than the competitors, for example, and that may be your primary concern. But I can definitely say that it's better than what I need for my own purposes.

I have owned the Epson 1280 for about three months now. I use it often to print photos I take with my Olympus E-10. For the money, I don't think you can beat this printer. I have tried others, Lexmark and H.P. and they don't compare. It prints very very high resolution photos but it does use lots of ink at the highest resolution. You will get fantastic prints using photo film but if you are looking for something more archival, I recommend only matte photo paper. Epson states in this format the archival life is about 20 years but I think 8 is probably closer to being correct.

There are better printers, but you would have to look in the professional range such as the Epson 5500 with the same resolution and archival qualities. It's also [much more]. For the money, ... I think without question this is the best photo printer on the market.

I highly recommend this printer. The quality is excellent. The set up is quite easy. At 1400dpi you can get an exceptional photo output. Even though the printer can print at 2800dpi, I would not recommend you choose this option. With the naked eyes, you can not make out the difference between 1400dpi and 2800dpi. You will waste a lot of ink and time at 2800dpi.