Epson C900 vs. Samsung CLP-500

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Hi,

Totally lost patience with inkjets! Dried up carts thru occasional use
etc.! Bad for my heart - it always goes on strike when I need the
printout urgently!

In UK entry colour lasers are around the 220 pounds (=350USD?) mark -
affordable enough to be a good option.

2 leading options are Samsung CLP-500 and Epson C900.

On paper (sorry!) the Samsung wins hands down:

+ 64Mb vs the paltry 16Mb from Epson
+ Samsung has a proper control panel on the printer. The Epson has nothing.
+ Samsung has proper Duplex. It's only optional on the Epson

The only positive for the Epson is the black refills are just over half
the price of the Samsung, so if I'm doing mainly black with occasional
colour the Epson will be cheaper. Offset by (probably) having to buy
more memory for the Epson?

BUT, from what I've read on reviews etc., the Epson print quality
appears to be better. This is obviously more important than features,
(I guess?).

I'm interested in personal experiences of either, comparisons if I'm
lucky, and views on the plusses/minusses of either option to help me decide.

I'm also interested in whether these objects are noisy when they're not
printing - do they power down like my trusty Laserjet 4L?

Thanks!

Pete

 

[dewi]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 19:59:54 +0000, Peter Boulton
<news@Data*n0-spam*Perceptions.co.uk> uttered:

>Hi,
>
>Totally lost patience with inkjets! Dried up carts thru occasional use
>etc.! Bad for my heart - it always goes on strike when I need the
>printout urgently!
>
>In UK entry colour lasers are around the 220 pounds (=350USD?) mark -
>affordable enough to be a good option.
>
>2 leading options are Samsung CLP-500 and Epson C900.
>
>On paper (sorry!) the Samsung wins hands down:
>
>+ 64Mb vs the paltry 16Mb from Epson
>+ Samsung has a proper control panel on the printer. The Epson has nothing.
>+ Samsung has proper Duplex. It's only optional on the Epson
>
>The only positive for the Epson is the black refills are just over half
>the price of the Samsung, so if I'm doing mainly black with occasional
>colour the Epson will be cheaper. Offset by (probably) having to buy
>more memory for the Epson?
>
>BUT, from what I've read on reviews etc., the Epson print quality
>appears to be better. This is obviously more important than features,
>(I guess?).
>
>I'm interested in personal experiences of either, comparisons if I'm
>lucky, and views on the plusses/minusses of either option to help me decide.
>
>I'm also interested in whether these objects are noisy when they're not
>printing - do they power down like my trusty Laserjet 4L?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Pete

Samsung is ultra quite

And one of the toner refills sites now do the Samsung.

I'm happy with it so far. But only use it for colour, us an older work
horse fro B+W stuff.


--
Dewi,

(remove spin for email)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Dewi wrote on 28/01/2005 23:12:
>
>
> Samsung is ultra quite
>
> And one of the toner refills sites now do the Samsung.
>
> I'm happy with it so far. But only use it for colour, us an older work
> horse fro B+W stuff.
>
>
> --
> Dewi,
>
> (remove spin for email)


Thanks! How do you rate the output quality (vs inkjets?)

All the best,

Pete

 

[dewi]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 12:50:36 +0000, Peter Boulton
<peter@data*no-spam*perceptions.co.uk> uttered:

>Dewi wrote on 28/01/2005 23:12:
>>
>>
>> Samsung is ultra quite
>>
>> And one of the toner refills sites now do the Samsung.
>>
>> I'm happy with it so far. But only use it for colour, us an older work
>> horse fro B+W stuff.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dewi,
>>
>> (remove spin for email)
>
>
>Thanks! How do you rate the output quality (vs inkjets?)
>
>All the best,
>
>Pete

Much better, but this is just for graphs, charts and diagrams, not
photos. Printed on cheap paper (80 g/m), OHP, card (160 g/m) and Avery
business cards/Labels all Good.

I normally use 90 g/m paper

Don't think I have tried photos.

The problem is the price of the toners.
http://www.refilltoner.com/MachineProducts.asp?id=SAMCLP500&manu=Samsung&mach=CLP%2D500++%2FN

I haven't tried them yet, but will do when I'm empty.


--
Dewi,

(remove spin for email)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Dewi wrote on 30/01/2005 13:57:
>>
>>Thanks! How do you rate the output quality (vs inkjets?)
>>
>>All the best,
>>
>>Pete
>
>
> Much better, but this is just for graphs, charts and diagrams, not
> photos. Printed on cheap paper (80 g/m), OHP, card (160 g/m) and Avery
> business cards/Labels all Good.
>
> I normally use 90 g/m paper
>
> Don't think I have tried photos.
>
> The problem is the price of the toners.
> http://www.refilltoner.com/MachineProducts.asp?id=SAMCLP500&manu=Samsung&mach=CLP%2D500++%2FN
>
> I haven't tried them yet, but will do when I'm empty.
>
>
> --
> Dewi,
>
> (remove spin for email)


Thanks again! Now I'm just hoping someone can kindly share their Epson
C900 experiences!

The views which prompted my op are here:

Epson C900: http://tinyurl.com/5umue
Samsung CLP-500: http://tinyurl.com/4ckt4

My interpretation is that more people seem happy with the Epson. But
the Samsung spec seems so much better - hence my dilemma / confusion.

I'm still open to be influenced!

Thanks again.

Pete