Epson Stylus Photo RX510

long lasting excelence – i've had this printer for about 6 years and printed about 5 pages a day off it. it just keeps going. everything still works. it doesn't have a fax but hey if your still using faxes your a bit behind the times anyway. when this dies i would love to buy another. massive durability 6 years+, easy to use,

Terrible – A big disappointment in that I was unaware of the operating costs when I bought it. The re-inking of the heads every time you switch it on consumes valuable ink from fairly small colour ink cartridges. I haven't used the printer to it's full capacity because I don't want the on-going costs of replacing the colour cartridges. The few times I have printed in colour the results were disappointing in that there were fine lines across the image down the whole page.

I wouldn't recommend buying unless you are prepared to be constantly putting your hands in your pocket to pay for replacement colour cartridges due to the re-inking process every time you turn the machine on. The fact that I rarely use it so now I save money by not having to keep on purchasing colour ink cartridges. That it is a 3 in one machine (printer, scanner, photo-copier. Also that it enables you to scan photo negatives and slides. The fact that every time you turn on the printer it re-inks the printer heads and uses up ink in all the colour and I assume black ink cartridges. Even if you just want to use the scanner and not the printer it will still use up ink when you first turn the machine on. The colour ink cartridges are not cheap (last time I bought them - some years ago now) they were on average $28.00 each. There are 5 colour cartridges and one black. So it's not cheap to be replacing colour cartridges when you are not even printing in colour. Consequently, I purchased a black and white laser printer (not Epson) and the Epson RX510 just sits there. I don't want to throw it out yet as it has hardly been used (uneconomical) and I paid so much for it 3 years ago.

Good – For its print quality alone it is worth the money BUT not having a Fax function compared to some other machines lets it down. Ease of use, can operate via computer or independently, fantastic print quality, good solid feed tray that folds up, photo capabilities excellent. No fax facility

OK – I have had my Epson RX510 for about five years now, and it does work very well. This one has six cartridges - Black, Magenta, Light magenta, Cyan, Light Cyan, and Yellow. The color it produces had wowed me five years ago but compared to todays printers, would probably pale in comparison. Like many printers, this prints better with Epson inks (no surprise there) the only trouble is, the individual inks are costly and if only one of the six inks run out, you will need to replace it, otherwise nothing will print, even if you aren't even using that color.

I tries to use a copy brand and after a short while, the heads were clogged.

My fauly, I should have kept using Epsons expensive inks.

Also, I had recently bought an SD card for my camera and when I put it in the SD card slot of the printer, it would not show the pictures so annoyingly, I have to use the USB to plug my camera into the computer to view.

Overall it's a good multi functional center that you could probably pick up quite cheaply these days. But be warned, the expense is in the inks and if you try to use an inferior brands of inks to save some money, prepare to have it serviced. The photo copier, flat bed scanner and printer all in the same unit is space saving as well as easy to use. Epson inks are expensive and if one of the six inks run out, it simply will not print - even if you are not using that particular color in your print.

A4 pages seem to more a fraction while printing and lets just say - this machine isn't exactly the quietest on the market.

Doesn't except all newer types of SD cards.

Good – ZDNet has a review at http://www.zdnet.com.au/reviews/hardware/printersscanners/0,39023422,20281488,00.htm that mentions variable results with text, especially at 3 point. Who the hell WANTS 3 point text when there’s choice? I haven’t found any problems with text at all, even on plain 80 gsm copy paper. And as I said above, photos are just brilliant — in all senses of the word. I find many people don’t even recognise the prints as coming from an inkjet; they mistake them for traditional “wet” process prints.

Epson has put an article from “Photo Review Australia” on-line at http://www.epson.com.au/pdf/photoreveiw_RX510.pdf. I have found this one to be very helpful, and it was the decider for me in getting the RX510. Though I don’t know what sort of computer they are running to get 12,800 dpi scans. My laptop can process up to 4800 dpi scans, which produce JPG files of around 12 MB, comparable to the present range of digital SLR’s with 6 to 8 MP sensors.

In short, I reckon this unit is just great. Whether it is for you depends really on whether the features meet your needs or not. If you’re a film user looking for good results without the expense of a separate printer and a high-end scanner such as the Epson 4870, I can heartily recommend this device. I bought my RX510 in July, and four months later can say that I am very happy with it.

I’m one of these die-hards who is not convinced digital is the way to go for my family photographs — I want something a little more permanent than computer software presently is —but do want the ability to print and email photos.

I use slide file (that is, “positive” film) and well as the more common negative film. I have found the results from slide film are just fantastic. The resulting prints have been far better than some of the traditional “wet” process prints I’ve had produced from slides by so-called professional labs. Eye popping colour with deep tones and vivid hues. The detail is good. When I say good, from an image that is 3.5 cm at its biggest, I can get a digital file that I can zoom in to make out individual threads and button holes on my little boys shirt. I reckon that’s pretty good!

The unit has a fluorescent light in the lid, revealed when taking the white copy mat out of the lid. It looks big enough to scan medium-format negatives, but the supplied holder is not big enough for them. I think its main function is to just keep negatives straight, and in line with the light, so presumably bigger negatives could be just put onto the glass. Dust has proven to be a problem, but that’s always the case in photography. A small speck that I miss with the eye shows up as a large chip on a scanned image — even with the dust removal function on. Grain removal also doesn’t seem to make a big difference, and using 400 ISO film results in visible grain when zooming in. 100 ISO film gives sharper results, but not visibly so when printing only up to A4. This will only be an issue if you scan on the RX510 and print on another machine at A3 or bigger.

As many reviews note, prints are just a little softer than the original. I don’t know if this softness is a function of the scanner, or the printer. Scans from negatives are good, with a little more variation in colour and not the same brilliance that I have obtained from slides. I guess it’s because the computer doesn’t have to invert the colours. If it really bugged me enough I could buy Silver Fast (www.silverfast.com) , a software package that comes with precise scanning colour algorithms for the most common negative films on the market. There are a few little niggles I have had. The software packages are adequate, but lack any detailed manuals. The on-line manuals are sparse and lacking in detail. If using any of them on Advanced mode, it is up to you to figure out what the differing settings are intended to achieve. I’m referring to ‘Unsharp mask filter’; ‘Grain Reduction’; ‘Colour Restoration’; and ‘Dust Removal’. Each has a ‘high’, ‘medium’ or ‘low’ setting available, but no documentation as to what each level is achieving. Those of you who are experienced with scanners will probably roll your eyes, but this is my first scanner. No, I’m no Luddite — I’m fairly tech savvy, but have never had a need for a scanner previously, and have bought this one primarily because home scanners are now sufficiently capable to resolve film into digital files.

There is also nothing to explain what function each package is intended to perform, and although some are fairly self-evidence, others seem to cover the same functions, with no discussion as to why or when one is preferable.

I also have trouble setting the scan size for film. The default setting is 35.3 mm x 22.6 mm. But, a normal 35 mm film frame is actually 36 mm x 24 mm. Not a huge difference maybe, but using an SLR camera means some of my shots are very tightly framed. In some cases this has meant scans using the default settings have cut off half a head! They can be manually changed, but despite a ‘lock’ button, do not stay set, and can only be set for a single frame at a time, whereas the default setting will apply for scanning up to six frames at a time.

Surprisingly, the available settings for paper types do not cover all the different types of Epson paper! But that hasn’t proven to be a problem.

Prints come out with slightly uneven borders, although the software on-screen display suggests this should not be the case. I’m only talking about the left-hand border being 3mm, and the right-hand being about 7mm, but it’s enough to be noticeable to the naked eye.