As we mentioned in our piece on the Kodak ESP 3, the biggest reason to upgrade to the ESP 5 is its 3” color LCD screen. Otherwise, an initial look at the spec sheet indicates that it’s basically the same MFP as its less expensive sibling. You get copy and scan functions, print speeds of nearly 30 ppm in color and black and white, inexpensive ink, intelligent photo editing software, and PC-free photo printing via PictBridge and memory card. But while you figure that actual tests would uncover some noticeable differences, the critics seem to find that the ESP 5 and ESP 3 offer a relatively similar set of features and benefits.

 

Justin Yu of CNET gives the ESP 5 a mediocre 2.5 stars out of 5 based on the same general issues that weigh down the ESP 3 in his mind - less-than-blazing print speed, subpar graphics quality, and a somewhat flimsy and awkward design. In fact, Yu finds that the “small plastic guide that’s supposed to align the paper according to its size” leads to a notable number of paper jams. The overall design also makes it a little harder to change ink cartridges and scan thick literature. However, Yu seems to appreciate that you can tilt the 3” LCD screen at a number of viewable angles, and that you can copy and scan straight from the home screen instead of “two or three clicks into the menu” like you do with other LCD-endowed printers.

 

Melissa Riofrio of PC World gives the ESP 5 a solid 76/100 for its sensibly designed control panel, practical software, and ink cartridges that are “significantly less expensive than any other color inkjet available.” That said, the printer is as slow as the ESP 3 and rolls out underwhelming output, except for photos printed on Kodak brand photo paper. According to Riofrio, the decision on whether or not to buy an ESP 5 ultimately comes down to balancing the low ink costs against the slow speed and lower-quality output.

 

So what should we conclude about the Kodak ESP lineup so far? Pretty much everyone agrees that both the ESP 3 and ESP 5 offer very affordable inks that are offset by certain design flaws, slow print speeds, and mediocre print quality. Personally, I view both models as prototypes made by a printer industry outsider trying to address high ink costs while applying its own previous expertise to an increasingly popular product. It’ll be interesting to see whether Kodak has absorbed the feedback and shored up the aforementioned weaknesses in designing the new ESP 7 and ESP 9, which we preview in our next couple of posts.