Experience of using CISS - to be or not to be?
I want to share the experience of the use of CISS (continuous ink supply system), which later turned into the use of refillable cartridges (PZK). At once I want to say that it is unassuming to print and the printer was initially taken to print a large amount of documents, sometimes with pictures.
Printer Epson CX7300, the cost of one color cartridge for which is 500 p.
Printer Epson CX7300, the cost of printing on which you want not to think.
Ciss?
')
So, the idea to buy a CISS came to my mind 1.5-2 years ago. Epson CX7300 is a good, smart and inexpensive printer (MFP, to be exact), with one drawback - a full set of cartridges (4 pieces) is 2/3 of the cost of the printer itself. And, as it was written somewhere, any attempt to save money is broken about the genius of Epson engineers.
I remember, there was an attempt to save on color cartridges and print only black. As a result, only a third of one of the color cartridges, which eventually had to be bought, went away exclusively on the ink run when turned on. It is impossible to use the original cartridge for a long time, even if it is printed at a minimum. If you need to print a lot, then it is better not to even think about original cartridges. For these reasons for 1000 p. (cost of 2 cartridges) and 400 rubles on top (almost the cost of one more) were actually purchased by the CISS itself and a set of ink for it.
The ink was chosen on a water-based, non-pigmented, because there are fewer difficulties with them (they dry more slowly, if they dry, it is easier to dilute). One capacity of ink costs 100 (now 110) rubles, while its capacity is 5-10 times more than the capacity of the original cartridge, which costs 500 rubles, that is, even by the most modest calculation, the savings go much more than 10 times! Since, as a result, PZK was purchased for the replacement of the CISS, I estimate the volume based on the experience of their refueling.
The only, in my opinion, minus CISS is the complexity of installation and maintenance. It is necessary to lay the cable so that it does not get used anywhere, you need to arrange the tanks on the same level with the printer, in case of transferring the printer you need to be especially careful with these containers, again, you need to arrange them so that the cat cannot reach them). As a result, for these purely technical reasons, I decided to change the CISS to the PLC.
It should be added that, tired of messing with the CISS, I began to frequently launch a bad result of nozzle check, as a result of which 2 out of 4 nozzles hardened tightly. Subsequently, for several days with the help of a proprietary solvent and syringes, in the ink replacement position, I “washed” the nozzles, while not forgetting to pour the solvent into the PZK and drive a considerable part through the nozzles in the regular nozzle cleaning and printing mode.
Epson CX7300 (3000 p.), Refillable cartridges (500 p. Whole kit, some cost up to 1000 p.), 4 bottles of paints (440 p. At new prices), 4 pharmaceutical syringes (bought in the same place as PZK, 10 p)
This whole set will be replaced by more than one and not two regular sets of maps, I think at least 5, perhaps more. 5 * 4 cards * 500 rubles = 10,000 rubles, that is, even the risk of breaking the printer (now a similar slightly more “cool” model costs 4,000 thousand) seems justified at such a cost of printing. The fall in print quality, if there is a place to be (and in any case it does), in my unassuming view of a person who is not a professional photographer, is uncritical and inconspicuous.
On one well-known resource, I saw an article about the fact that non-original inks were 2 times more often banished, that they would start spilling into the printer and it would break and so on. In my experience, I can say: even for a person with not quite straight arms (for me), in the case of the PZK, everything will work as it should, and for a long time! In the case of a CISS, it is desirable to still have straight arms. In this regard, PZKs are more suitable for home use, while for large volumes of stamps, a properly installed CISS is better suited. Competently!
So what to choose?
Their only plus is ease of installation. You can talk more about good print quality, but the printer for 3000 p. clearly not intended for professional printing of photographs, but for amateur printing or printing documents, the only negative of original cartridges will be crucial - their price is too high.
Suitable for those who do not want to risk the printer and are willing to lay out a rather large amount each time you need to buy a new set, or those who want the maximum print quality.
Pros:
Minuses:
It is more suitable for small businesses when you do not want to spend money on a laser printer, or for those who print quite a lot all year round.
Pros:
Minuses:
Suitable for those who print is not very much or much, but not periodically (including students).
If the main criterion is not the quality of photo printing, and the printer is not professional, definitely take it! My choice for home use - PZK. The risk of spoiling the printer with due care is small (in the case of a PZK it is practically zero) and is money-justified. In the case of expensive models, it is necessary to weigh the costs, since, as far as I know, the more expensive the printer is, theoretically, the printing should be cheaper.
UPD: Here is the article about which you spoke: www.thg.ru/consumer/epson_inkjet/index.html
UPD2: On the epson site itself, they also staged anti-advertizing of non-native cards and CISS:
inks.epson.ru
Even a visual animation done.
We have:
Printer Epson CX7300, the cost of one color cartridge for which is 500 p.
We want:
Printer Epson CX7300, the cost of printing on which you want not to think.
Decision:
Ciss?
')
So, the idea to buy a CISS came to my mind 1.5-2 years ago. Epson CX7300 is a good, smart and inexpensive printer (MFP, to be exact), with one drawback - a full set of cartridges (4 pieces) is 2/3 of the cost of the printer itself. And, as it was written somewhere, any attempt to save money is broken about the genius of Epson engineers.
I remember, there was an attempt to save on color cartridges and print only black. As a result, only a third of one of the color cartridges, which eventually had to be bought, went away exclusively on the ink run when turned on. It is impossible to use the original cartridge for a long time, even if it is printed at a minimum. If you need to print a lot, then it is better not to even think about original cartridges. For these reasons for 1000 p. (cost of 2 cartridges) and 400 rubles on top (almost the cost of one more) were actually purchased by the CISS itself and a set of ink for it.
The ink was chosen on a water-based, non-pigmented, because there are fewer difficulties with them (they dry more slowly, if they dry, it is easier to dilute). One capacity of ink costs 100 (now 110) rubles, while its capacity is 5-10 times more than the capacity of the original cartridge, which costs 500 rubles, that is, even by the most modest calculation, the savings go much more than 10 times! Since, as a result, PZK was purchased for the replacement of the CISS, I estimate the volume based on the experience of their refueling.
The only, in my opinion, minus CISS is the complexity of installation and maintenance. It is necessary to lay the cable so that it does not get used anywhere, you need to arrange the tanks on the same level with the printer, in case of transferring the printer you need to be especially careful with these containers, again, you need to arrange them so that the cat cannot reach them). As a result, for these purely technical reasons, I decided to change the CISS to the PLC.
It should be added that, tired of messing with the CISS, I began to frequently launch a bad result of nozzle check, as a result of which 2 out of 4 nozzles hardened tightly. Subsequently, for several days with the help of a proprietary solvent and syringes, in the ink replacement position, I “washed” the nozzles, while not forgetting to pour the solvent into the PZK and drive a considerable part through the nozzles in the regular nozzle cleaning and printing mode.
As a result, we have:
Epson CX7300 (3000 p.), Refillable cartridges (500 p. Whole kit, some cost up to 1000 p.), 4 bottles of paints (440 p. At new prices), 4 pharmaceutical syringes (bought in the same place as PZK, 10 p)
This whole set will be replaced by more than one and not two regular sets of maps, I think at least 5, perhaps more. 5 * 4 cards * 500 rubles = 10,000 rubles, that is, even the risk of breaking the printer (now a similar slightly more “cool” model costs 4,000 thousand) seems justified at such a cost of printing. The fall in print quality, if there is a place to be (and in any case it does), in my unassuming view of a person who is not a professional photographer, is uncritical and inconspicuous.
On one well-known resource, I saw an article about the fact that non-original inks were 2 times more often banished, that they would start spilling into the printer and it would break and so on. In my experience, I can say: even for a person with not quite straight arms (for me), in the case of the PZK, everything will work as it should, and for a long time! In the case of a CISS, it is desirable to still have straight arms. In this regard, PZKs are more suitable for home use, while for large volumes of stamps, a properly installed CISS is better suited. Competently!
So what to choose?
Original cartridges:
Their only plus is ease of installation. You can talk more about good print quality, but the printer for 3000 p. clearly not intended for professional printing of photographs, but for amateur printing or printing documents, the only negative of original cartridges will be crucial - their price is too high.
Suitable for those who do not want to risk the printer and are willing to lay out a rather large amount each time you need to buy a new set, or those who want the maximum print quality.
CISS
Pros:
- put in once and forgot, only occasionally remembering that you need to refill paint;
- price is the main plus!
Minuses:
- must be straight arms for installation;
- the installation itself may require irreversible changes to the printer;
- you need to constantly monitor the level of ink, since at the same position of the tanks the difference of 20-40% in the level of ink can lead to the fact that the ink simply stops flowing into the cartridges, while the level is too high in relation to printing head can lead to blots - checked!
It is more suitable for small businesses when you do not want to spend money on a laser printer, or for those who print quite a lot all year round.
PZK:
Pros:
- it is not necessary to have straight arms, anyone can fill with a syringe with the observance of elementary accuracy;
- low price on par with CISS, the possibility of refueling without the need to extract the card;
Minuses:
- in order to see the level of ink, you have to get it, in connection with which in practice, after all, every refill is associated with removing the cartridge from the printer;
- The use of a syringe for refilling still requires accuracy, the possibility of smearing in the ink during refilling.
Suitable for those who print is not very much or much, but not periodically (including students).
Conclusion:
If the main criterion is not the quality of photo printing, and the printer is not professional, definitely take it! My choice for home use - PZK. The risk of spoiling the printer with due care is small (in the case of a PZK it is practically zero) and is money-justified. In the case of expensive models, it is necessary to weigh the costs, since, as far as I know, the more expensive the printer is, theoretically, the printing should be cheaper.
UPD: Here is the article about which you spoke: www.thg.ru/consumer/epson_inkjet/index.html
UPD2: On the epson site itself, they also staged anti-advertizing of non-native cards and CISS:
inks.epson.ru
Even a visual animation done.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/111177/
All Articles