Epson DFX-9000, 1550 Zeichen pro Sekunde, 240 x 144 DPI, 1320 Zeichen pro Sekunde, 330 Zeichen pro Sekunde, 10,12 Zeichen pro Zoll, 10 Kopien
Bewertungen von Epson DFX-9000, 1550 Zeichen pro Sekunde, 240 x 144 DPI, 1320 Zeichen pro Sekunde, 330 Zeichen pro Sekunde, 10,12 Zeichen pro Zoll, 10 Kopien
Basierend auf 7 Bewertungen
This thing is an insane workhorse. Had the same printer 20 years ago, and when it says 1550 characters a second, it *means* it. However, that does mean there are two things (which caused a one-star rating I noted) to beware of: * You need to place it on something *solid*, not your usual printer stand. Use a low filing cabinet or something. Otherwise, it will sway -- badly. * It ain't quiet, neither. I suggest getting a printer enclosure.
This thing is an insane workhorse. Had the same printer 20 years ago, and when it says 1550 characters a second, it *means* it. However, that does mean there are two things (which caused a one-star rating I noted) to beware of: * You need to place it on something *solid*, not your usual printer stand. Use a low filing cabinet or something. Otherwise, it will sway -- badly. * It ain't quiet, neither. I suggest getting a printer enclosure.
Kenneth D'ambrosio
7. August 2017
It's a workhorse for what we need it to do. Very reliable machine
It's a workhorse for what we need it to do. Very reliable machine
Jeff Johnson
14. Juni 2017
Printer returned to the supplier, paid $500.00 restocking fee, not satisfied the performance, too noisy and the printer shaking real bad.
Printer returned to the supplier, paid $500.00 restocking fee, not satisfied the performance, too noisy and the printer shaking real bad.
Amazon Customer
12. Mai 2017
Very happy, works well beyond our expectations, would highly recommend!
Very happy, works well beyond our expectations, would highly recommend!
Mary
22. Oktober 2015
Good compatible product, the Spring does not have as much tension as the original but it works just as good
Good compatible product, the Spring does not have as much tension as the original but it works just as good
Winston Roach
25. April 2014
