Epson 880 vs 870

[rick]

I'm confused. Why are 880s going for considerably more on ebay than
870s? The 880 has four colors, 870 six. I like to print, so I refill.
The 870 has spongeless, easy to fill, easily resettable carts -- and the
880 requires messing around, sucking out foam and numerous cleaning
cycles. I'm about to switch from the 880 to an 870. What am I missing?
Be kind.

 

[Jan Alter]

Well I'm ignorant of the 870 but have used the 880 extensively for the
past 4 years. The 880 (IMO) was one of the very best non-chipped printers
that Epson put out for photo work and everyday printing. A set of third
party cartridges can be had for this printer for $7 or less that produce
beautiful prints on Epson paper. It prints a heck of a lot more quiet than
its predecessor, the 740.
At our school in Philadelphia I take care of 16 of these 880 machines.
And after 4 years of use they are all still running and with us using those
third party cartridges (BTW.. they're from Inktek).
The 870, from what you are saying, is a 6 color printer and so the
cartridges are probably more difficult to get and most likely more
expensive. If anyone is into photo work seriously they're not going to mess
around with an older model machine when the newer machines offer things such
as piment ink and archival lastisity. Money, though important, is not the
first incentive for getting a good photo printer.

Just my two cents while being kind.

 

[Arthur Entlich]

The 880 is a pretty reliable printer, has no chip in the cartridge
making generics very inexpensive. Being 4 color it uses a lt les sink
also. So basically it is a reliable printer that costs very little to
keep up and running.

Art

 

[Ed Ruf]

The 880 is a pretty reliable printer, has no chip in the cartridge
making generics very inexpensive. Being 4 color it uses a lt les sink
also. So basically it is a reliable printer that costs very little to
keep up and running.

IIRC there are also quadtone ink sets available for it for those who wish
to print B&W photos.