Yes, when you do the maths and subtract the cost of the supplied inks
that come with the 3800 it comes very close to the price of the 2880 and
the 3880 inks are cheaper per ml to replace later. I checked and I have
had mine for just under 5 months and I bulk bought a supply of inks to
the value of one third of the inks you get with the 3800 and I am nearly
through them. I think for me it would be around 18 months before the
3800 would pay for itself .
e.g here the 2880 was 1000SFr and the 3800 2000SFr but comes with 800SFr
worth of ink, I bought the 2880 plus 270SFr worth of inks so say thats
1250SFr and I am nearly a third through the year, so by the end of the
year I will spend another 500SFr on ink with current usage bringing the
yearly total to 1750SFr - very close to the cost of the 3800, the
figures aren't exact but near enough.
The reason I ignored all the advice on the photo-i forums ;-) and didn't
buy a 3800 is because of the higher initial cost and I thought the
r2880 being latest technology would produce much better prints (its
seems printers reached sufficiency a long time ago), also I knew the
3800 wasted more ink when swapping between matt and gloss. ( I have
stuck to gloss so this turned out to be a non issue for me) I stand by
my original statement though If I could make the choice again I would
buy the 3800 for the extra print size and having to change cartidges
less often.
Maybe I will print less as the novelty wears off but I don't think I
would regret having the 3800 sitting there with the chance to print bigger
Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> But you would also have required inks for the 3800. Have you factored
> in the differential?
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|