Best Digital Camera Photo Printer
Discussion
To be honest, I've not printed anything at home for nearly 2 years. If you work out the costs of ink + good paper places like www.photobox.co.uk come out quite well.
I used a HP 6x4 photosmart printer, the quality is fantastic, i tend to print out a fair few of my shots off my 4MP camera and they're always good and the colours are always perfect. And the printer cartridges last a fair amount of time too! i must have done about 100 prints and the cartridge is still alive!
Yes Marki, apparently so. Slightly biased in that we currently have a Photosmart 1000 (which ain't bad) but inkjet technology has moved on a bit in 3 years, hence looking around.
Slightly biased towards the HP because it just feels better built - the multi stage output tray on the R800 felt plasticky and liable to break at any time, I felt.
Most review sites rate the pair of these VERY highly, although none gives one the edge - the 7960 if you print a lot of B&W, but thats about it really.
Greg
Slightly biased towards the HP because it just feels better built - the multi stage output tray on the R800 felt plasticky and liable to break at any time, I felt.
Most review sites rate the pair of these VERY highly, although none gives one the edge - the 7960 if you print a lot of B&W, but thats about it really.
Greg
ThatPhilBrettGuy said:www.pixaco.co.uk/ is much cheaper. Uses the same kit, just the pictures come via Germany
To be honest, I've not printed anything at home for nearly 2 years. If you work out the costs of ink + good paper places like www.photobox.co.uk come out quite well.
J
The only thing I don't like about HP is the cartridge cost. Like Lexmark they include new printheads, unlike Canon and Epson which are just tanks of ink. Also, there are fewer compnaies doing own brand/remanufactured versions. Mind you, having experimented with these, I'm now back on the pukka HP ones and just trying to shop wisely. But they'r enot cheap!
simpo two said:
The only thing I don't like about HP is the cartridge cost. Like Lexmark they include new printheads, unlike Canon and Epson which are just tanks of ink. Also, there are fewer compnaies doing own brand/remanufactured versions. Mind you, having experimented with these, I'm now back on the pukka HP ones and just trying to shop wisely. But they'r enot cheap!
and thats one of the problems they are hidiously expensive on consumables , i guess they dontt last all that long either
also kodaks width of colours is limited and it will only print to 10x8... the advantage is print time, it churns them out pretty quickly, thats about where it stops!
the technology in high end inkjets surpasses the kodak machines and all the other dye sub machines.
but the most crucial thing whichever printer you use is colour management, making sure your monitor is profiled, and the printer is profiled to the papers and inks you use, most high end photoshops offer this service and its not hugely expensive. however without it, no matter which printer you have the results will be average, and when you have done that.. you can get your camera profiled to match!
>> Edited by bacchus180 on Friday 8th October 13:56
the technology in high end inkjets surpasses the kodak machines and all the other dye sub machines.
but the most crucial thing whichever printer you use is colour management, making sure your monitor is profiled, and the printer is profiled to the papers and inks you use, most high end photoshops offer this service and its not hugely expensive. however without it, no matter which printer you have the results will be average, and when you have done that.. you can get your camera profiled to match!
>> Edited by bacchus180 on Friday 8th October 13:56
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff