Epson WorkForce WF-7525

  morddwyd 11 May 12

Anybody with direct hands on experience of this all in one?

I am looking for an A3 copier and like the look of this one but not sure about performance.

I need it for A3 copying of original artwork, and obviously colour rendition is absolutely paramount. Unlike photos, software tweaking is not suitable.

Tried a Brother but it's a bit muddy and a bit flimsy in the build quality.

None of the retailers I've visited are willing to set one up and let me try a trial print, obviously not interested in a £300 sale!

  Woolwell 11 May 12

Not a good review Epson WF-7525

  morddwyd 12 May 12

On the other hand there are a couple of five star reviews on Amazon.

The trouble is they all seem more concerned with duplex printing and paper handling than colour rendition!

  Woolwell 12 May 12

Retailers are not going to set one up for a trial print in case it is then not sold as they will then be left with an out-of-box demo machine.

I note that they are referred to as business scanners on the Epson site.

  morddwyd 12 May 12

"Retailers are not going to set one up for a trial print in case it is then not sold as they will then be left with an out-of-box demo machine."

Perhaps not every machine in stock, and perhaps not in your area, but most big retailers locally have half a dozen or so set up for demos.

Even if the actual model you are interested in is not there you can normally get some idea from another model from the same manufacturer. For instance, in this particular case, the Epson 7515 uses the same print engine and much of the same carriage as the 7525, it just has an A4 glass screen and scales up to A3, rather than a direct copy.

The last one I bought, a Canon Pixma, was available for demo, funnily enough in PC World, though a different branch.

  clm 06 Jun 12

I've had the WF-7525 for a few days now. No problem with print quality: normal mode provides acceptably clear, crisp text. Examined under a magnifying glass, letter edges are slightly less sharp than print from my Canon MX860 but the difference is minimal and to the naked eye results are excellent. Finer settings approach laser quality but are slower. Photo prints are also outstanding – though not quite as good as the Canon: colour is ever-so-slightly muddier and less vibrant (might be correctable using printer settings), and fine detail, especially in darker areas, is less well defined. This is true for plain paper at normal quality and glossy photo paper at best quality. However the differences are marginal and unless you are unusually demanding or a professional photographer prints are more than acceptable for most business or personal use. For morddwyd's original artwork copying it might be less satisfactory - depends on the degree of quality needed. This is also a speedy printer, much faster than my Canon, although pre-print processing can take up to twenty seconds.

  morddwyd 06 Jun 12

Many thanks for the very constructive reply.

Hopefully I'm not too demanding, and I certainly won't be using a magnifying glass!

My current A3 printer is a Brother, and colour rendition is always a bit hit and miss, and usually ends up with some sort of compromise.


This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

How to watch Wimbledon 2015 live online: follow the tennis from your laptop or PC

We are being sold the ability to spend money we don't have. And we love it

HTC's head designer on what's exciting in designing for mobile right now

Apple Music preview: Why Spotify should be scared of Apple's impressive new music-streaming service

We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message