Brother bottled ink BT5000/6000

[Ink stained Fingers]

I'm wondering why Epson has made another different set of bottled ink, because there are already these two sets: 4-color (T 664x) and 6-color (T 673x) in 80ml bottles.

HP, Brother and Canon each have one set of bottled inks for their tank system printers - all entry level models.
Epson now has a range of inks in bottles - Epson 664 for the entry level L... series printers and earlier ET.. Ecotank models, Epson 102 for the newer Ecotank ET models, and it is not clear from the description whether that's the same inks or not - the product brochures don't tell you , but I'm doing a test with those. The Epson 102 bottles have a mechanically coded fill in top, the Epson 664 bottles are just simple bottles . And there are the T673 inks for the L800/805/1800 printers performing better than the 664 inks, and there are the Epson 106 inks for the ET7700/7750 which perform pretty much as the Fujifilm DL inks. And there are some more details - the Epson 664 ink set is all dye CMYK , the 102 ink set uses CMY dye inks and a pigment black, the T673 inks are 6 color dyes, and the 106 ink set comes with CMYK dye inks and an additional pigment black. Epson is using Durabrite pigment inks on the XP home office and Workforce WF... printers since a long time, but there is no tank system printer at this time using using an all pigment ink set (yet). Higher performance workforce printers come with ink bags instead at this time.
(Don't get confused too much - Epson may use other numbers for these inksets in other busisness regions than in Europe...)

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

Let me update the readings for the fading test with the Epson 106 - Fujifilm DL and HP GT52 inks now after 4 weeks,
on the Sihl PE glossy paper, the Brother inks are out of the test now due to disappointing performance.

___Ink_____Epson_106______Fuji_DL_____Brother_BT5000______HP__GT52
(on glossy PE Sihl paper)
__________C__M__Y__T____C__M__Y__T_____C__M__Y__T________C__M__Y__T (T=Total)

__week1___2--0--0--2____2--0--1--3____14--1--0--15_______7--0--0--7
__week2___5--0--0--5____5--0--1--6____23--3--0--26______12--0--0-12
__week4__13--0--3-16___13--3--1-17____------------______22--3--0-25

The overall trend stabilizes - the Epson 106 inks and the DL inks run pretty much parallel, the HP inks drop off in relative performance in this test, but since this is an ink for thermal printheads it is not a direct competitor, and the superior performance vs. the Canon bottled inks has been shown in the previous test results.
It is interesting to see that Epson is marketing 3 different ink sets with very much the same fading performance - the Surelab Ultrachrome D6 inks, very similar to the Fujifilm DL inks, the Claria dye inks for the smaller photo printers and the Epson 106 bottled ink for the ET-7700/7750 photo combos. The good performance of the Epson 106 inks let me phase over from the the DL inks to the 106 inks, they offer very good performance and good availability and pricing for convenient 70ml bottles.
( I measured as well the lightness changes over these 4 weeks of the dye black of the DL and 106 inks, it's as well the same, black is omitted in the above test results since the HP inks don't come with a dye black ink.)

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I found some test patches printed with Octopus-office refill inks for the Brother DCP-195C , this printer was the last one sold with cartridges without chips, a kind of IP4000 companion in this sense.
I placed such a patch sheet into the environment together with color patches printed just recently with the Brother BT5000 bottled inks for their inktank printers.

That's what I get after one week - for the sum of the lightness changes of the CMY patches added up

Brother BT 5000 ink 37
Octopus Office ink 36

Both inks fade equally fast, there is no reason at all to pay a brand name premium for the BT5000 inks, there are
even cheaper inks available which fade as quick/bad as the Brother inks.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I scanned the color patches with the Epson 106 etc inks again on the Labelheaven cast coated paper, this run now after 6 weeks with these results:

___Ink_____Epson_106______Fuji_DL_____Brother_BT5000______HP__GT52
(on cc Labelheaven glossy paper)

__________C__M__Y__T____C__M__Y___T_____C__M__Y__T________C__M__Y__T (T=Total)

__week1___0--0--1--1____0--3--1---4____15--0--0--15_______1--0--0--1
__week2___0--0--0--0____0--4--2---6____26--8--0--34_______5--0--0--5
__week4___5--5--0-10____4--8--5--17____41-43--0--84______11--1--1-13
__week6___6--8--1-15____7-12--6--25____------------______17--3--3-23

It is interesting to see, the Epson 106 ink is outperforming the Fujifilm DL ink now, and the HP ink fairs very good in this run as well. There are quite some differences between the C inks by vendor and the M inks as well.
I'll have the other 6 week data on the RC Sihl paper next week. The Brother inks are out of competition now.

 

[martin0reg]

My "desert lamp" seems to be weaker than in previous tests - or my paper better.
Because after one month the prints are showing less fading in general than I would have expected.
We know that AldiSihl is a much better paper than Labelheaven, I will use the cheap paper next time to speed up the fading.

So I have one scan of three B&W prints using all color inks (and no text black), from left to right:
- Canon GI bottled ink for Canon Ink Tank Printers (G-series, only C-M-Y)
- Canon BCI out of big carts for Canon LFP, which are NOT photo printers and not marketed as UV resistant. I use this rather for reliable ink flow than to prevent fading.
- And last not least the new HP GT ink for printers of the new ink tank series from HP

Added one scan of two pairs of color prints, BCI and GT.

Please excuse that I printed the test sheets withouut any profiling, so the pairs of prints of which one was kept in the dark (on top) and one exposed to the terrarium bulb (on bottom) are not the same. Gi print is somewhat greenish, BCI looks lihgter and bluish.
As I said in previous tests, please look at how much the (lower) prints are fading compared to the upper prints. And then try to compare the difference..



To my eyes the Canon GI prints are a fading a bit slower than the BCI - but they both are of the faster fading sort. Note that canon GI is fading uneven, the weak green tint of the original prints is visibly stronger, "greener".
The BCI is fading fast, maybe a little bit slower or more even than tha GI.
Now the new HP GT ink series is the slowest fading of the three ... how slow or fast I have not calculate.
While the new GT ink may not be the best of all inks in your current test, IFS
- you may have found at least a slower fading ink, perhaps the slowest fading ink for canon bubble-jet-printheads which is available for refillers (except canon chromalife)

Thanks for that!
martin0reg

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

that's interesting results, I'm just measuring the fading of the CMY inks saturated and collect some numbers, this allows some ranking but does not indicate how real prints perform with lots of colors - mixed , saturated or unsaturated , light or dark with such inks, your test is focussed on Canon/HP inks as candidates for refill. I think there are two questions left for the interested user - which refill dye black ink is the most fade resistant ink for Canon printers, and are the HP GT52 inks suitable for longer use with Canon printers. The HP C and M inks have a different hue than the typical inks for Epson printers, I have the impression that magenta tends more to red and cyan more to blue. That's differences which can be compensated for with an icm-Profile created for these inks.
And you comment that the paper type impacts the fade performance, I have
another test running to show that in direct comparison, I'll report a summary probably in a month from now. The outdoor test conditions vary from week to week, I cannot just take results from different test runs during different weeks and combine them into one table.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I'm updating the fading test results with the Epson 106 inks on the Sihl PE paper now after 6 weeks, this is
the companion test to posting #34 above, on the Labelheaven cc Paper - with the same inks.
I made a wrong assumption for a while, I did lots of tests in the past with a cc 180 gr Labelheaven paper which let the inks fade faster than on the PE papers, Sihl etc, I'm now using a 230gr Labelheaven cc paper with a surprising difference, it does not let the inks fade as fast as on the 180 gr paper but pretty much slower , close to the Sihl PE paper or better. The 230 gr paper does not just has the same coating as on the 180 gr paper with a thicker paper base but the coating may be thicker, or the thicker paper protects better against ozone penetration from the back side - I just don't know .
Comapre these numbers against those in #34. O.k., there is one other difference - this test started a week later than the test above.

___Ink_____Epson_106______Fuji_DL_____Brother_BT5000______HP__GT52
(on glossy PE Sihl paper)

__________C__M__Y__T____C__M__Y__T_____C__M__Y__T________C__M__Y__T (T=Total)

__week1___2--0--0--2____2--0--1--3____14--1--0--15_______7--0--0--7
__week2___5--0--0--5____5--0--1--6____23--3--0--26______12--0--0-12
__week4__13--0--3-16___13--3--1-17____------------______22--3--0-25
__week6__15--2--5-22___23--5--1-29____------------______38--9--0-47

The HP inks don't perform as good as the Fuji or Epson inks but still much better than any 3rd party refill ink or Canon GT490 inks for the G... ink tank printers. And the Epson 106 inks are now outperforming the Fujifilm inks in this test.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I did a quick test of the Brother BT5000 inks vs. Octopus-office inks for Brother - see #33 above,

these are the totals at the end of the 2nd week

Brother BT 5000 ink 37-----61 (total CMY luminance change)
Octopus Office ink 36-----62
These inks run pretty much in synch, even on different cast coated papers. I'm stopping this test, Brother bottled inks
are not recommendable for their ink tank printers. Brother units use piezo printheads, they run w/o problem as well with Epson suitable inks, the Epson 106 inks are barely more expensive.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I'm running another fading test since 4 weeks, and I like to give you some details, not with tables too large this time, but showing some surprising details which indicate how difficult it is to come to a consistent judgement beyond a specific test. Numbers mentioned are the totals of the luminance changes of the CMY patches or the lum. increase for black (dye) only. I'm not including here pigment blacks which are part of some of the ink sets.

These inks are part of the Test - Fujifilm DL, Epson 106, Epson 664, Epson 102 and HP GT52 all bottled inks for the resp. tank system printers of Epson and HP, all test patches printed with an Epson WF-2010W. I'm using just a limited set of papers - the standard ones I'm using since a long time - Sihl/(Aldi), and Labelheaven LH 180 and 230. There are more papers in the cabinet not used in these tests.

How does the Epson 106 ink perform, the assumed equivalent to the Epson Claria inks - the 106 inks perform somewhat better than the DL inks on Sihl 17 vs. 24 ,that is consistent with the other tests - no surprise here. The DL inks on the LH230 paper are at 22 which is surprisingly good, and the 106 ink on the LH230 is with 17 as good as the DL ink.
________DL-----106
Sihl------24-------17
LH230---22-------17

Let me list some results for the HP inks, this ink is much better on the LH230 paper than on the Sihl which looks like a surprise

Sihl------37---(23-11-3) for CMY
LH230---19---(12--6-1) for CMY
These inks are fading faster on the Sihl paper than on the LH230, the first ink set doing this.

What are the differences between the Epson 664 and 102 inks, the 664 inks are supplied with the first generation
of tank system printers - the L....models and a range of ET.... models, the bottles are simple, and colors could be filled into the wrong tank and may drop when withdrawn after filling up. The 102 bottles come with newer ET... models, with dye CMY inks and a pigment black. The 102 and 106 bottles have a mechanically coded bottle top for a smoother filling process , very similar to the Canon GI490 bottles.

------------102---664
Sihl--------23-----35
LH180-----55
LH230-------------56

either the inks or the paper were missing to print the other combinations, compare these numbers to the 17 of the 106 ink from above, it shows the significant difference between these inks and papers.

And let me add some numbers for the black dye inks as available in the ink sets.

-------------Sihl--LH230
Fuji DL-----6------10
Ep 664----27------42
Ep 106-----5------18

The black dye inks are much weaker on the LH230 than on the Sihl paper, the 106 and DL inks are close together and by far the strongest.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

This is the final update after 8 weeks for the Epson 106 ink vs. Fuji vs. HPGT52 on Sihl and Labelheaven 230gr

___Ink_____Epson_106______Fuji_DL_____Brother_BT5000______HP__GT52
(on cc Labelheaven 230 glossy paper)

__________C__M__Y__T____C__M__Y___T_____C__M__Y__T________C__M__Y__T (T=Total)

__week1___0--0--1--1____0--3--1---4____15--0--0--15_______1--0--0--1
__week2___0--0--0--0____0--4--2---6____26--8--0--34_______5--0--0--5
__week4___5--5--0-10____4--8--5--17____41-43--0--84______11--1--1-13
__week6___6--8--1-15____7-12--6--25____------------______17--3--3-23
__week8___8-11--5-24___10-13--9--25____------------______21--6--5-32

___Ink_____Epson_106______Fuji_DL_____Brother_BT5000______HP__GT52
(on glossy PE Sihl/Aldi paper)

__________C__M__Y__T____C__M__Y__T_____C__M__Y__T________C__M__Y__T (T=Total)

__week1___2--0--0--2____2--0--1--3____14--1--0--15_______7--0--0--7
__week2___5--0--0--5____5--0--1--6____23--3--0--26______12--0--0-12
__week4__13--0--3-16___13--3--1-17____------------______22--3--0-25
__week6__15--2--5-22___23--5--1-29____------------______38--9--0-47
__week8__35--5--6-46___35--7--1-43____------------______44-13--5-62

The Epson 106 and Fujifilm inks perform quite similar , the HP GT52 ink follows in pretty close distance.
It is interesting to see that the cheap cc Labelheaven 230gr let all inks fade slower than the Sihl glossy in this
test. (And just forget the Brother BT5000 inks...)