Printer Recommendations Please

[breezer]

I am looking to purchase an inkjet printer for home to replace an old panny colour dot matrix printer.
I would like the printer to be able to produce near photo quality docs as I want to print copies of baby breezer who arrived last week.

I am looking ot spend a max of £150.

Breezer

[Guru]

Epson 810 Photo!

[Wombat]

From everything I've been hearing, the latest HP printers are getting great marks. Yeah, I know I work there, but my last printer wasn't an HP, but my next one probably will be.
The HP 5550 goes for $135 here, and does 1200x1200, 17ppm black and white, 12ppm color, and the photo kit does 4800x1200 resolution.

[Guru]

The problem with hp is that the ink cost more then the printers so basicly you should trow away the printer and buy a new one each time it's out of inc!

[Wombat]

And who <I>isn't</I> like that? Don't say Epson - they may be less $/cartridge, but their cartridges have 3-5x less ink.

[az]

Still, I bought myself an HP, and it's really an OK printer, but probably my last HP... Their ink is just too expensive (and refills too). C't does state costs per page, and HP's are more expensive than others, especially when using refills (and they have become so good that they're really an option now).

AZ

[Greebe]

The reason HP print cartridges cost more than say Epson is because the print head is built into each one. Far less clogging far less headaches than the competition. My last Epson printer sucked the cartridges dry in nothing flat... and it wasn't printing that was doing it but everytime I turned the biatch on it cleaned the heads like no tommorrow (and pissing away expensive ink)

[az]

Get a Tektronix Phaser - no more worrying about black ink - it's free

AZ

[Reverend Maynard]

HP did drop the price of their black cartridges with this new line of printers. If I remember correctly there is a 1 ml difference between the old blacks and the new ones, but the new ones cost $20, instead of $30+. The 5550 is a pretty nice printer, butt ass ugly, but it puts out nice prints.

[Dr Mordrid]

I'll NEVER buy another Epson printer again. Once burned....

The problem: if the printheads clog up you might as well buy a new printer. Disassembling an Epson to replace them will either;

1. drive you crazy doing it yourself.

2. drive you to the poorhouse if you pay someone else to do it, relegating the printer to disposable status.

With other printers I've owned you can easily change the printheads. With some (HP & Lexmark) you do this with every tank change. With others (Canons) you can change the tanks only or change the printhead/carrier when it dies.

Dr. Mordrid

[az]

Oh, there's something I don't like about HP:

Most of their models only have one ink tank for the three colors. This means that as soon as one color is empty, you have to throw the rest away and buy a new tank. Plus, they use color when you print black text. You can prevent this by selecting "grayscale" or something like that in the drivers, which prevents the use of the color cartridge, and I've not seen any quality difference for just plain black text - but the question arises: why do they do this, if not to significantly improve text quality?

AZ

[Drizzt]

I sell all kinds of printer, Epson and HP more that others because they often broke and customers pay for us fixing them.

And, obviously, because they consume large amount of ink that is really expensive (to the final user, I think that no one knows that the final recharge of an ink tank is really high )



I'm waiting to see the day when people will notice that at the end laser color printer are less expensive

[az]

NOT for photorealistic prints, and not for the home user, unless they become MUCH cheaper, but then toner prices will explode

AZ

[LvR]

..............one ink tank for the three colors. This means that as soon as one color is empty, you have to throw the rest away and buy a new tank

Personally I view that to be a requirement on any low-volume photo-quality inkjet printer that I will ever use or buy.

The cost of inkjet ink is nuts - and to now have to do a prime/calibration print to first get the newly refilled ink through and ensure consistantly repeatable/reproducable colors is just not sensible - the Epson printers I have tried (790/895/2000) that also run on multicell sealed cartridges, chews about 1 % of the current available ink volume with every calibartion/prime action!.

I would much rather have HP or Epson or who-ever, waste their ink in the factory in order to ensure consistant ink quality that is usable from the word GO.

I can recommend the HP930/40/50/60 entry level printers based on personal experience - always have had very good results with any brand of paper I fed them - and yes their cartridges are very expensive, but if you compare the cost per ml of ink to any other brands cartridges, you will find that it is about the same.

I would have a look around your suppliers to determine what photographic paper is available. In my experience I found the Epson range of printers to be very particular as to the brand of paper that is used and they often require Epson branded paper to perform at their optimum. Ilford branded cat # 192 1948 is a no-no on these printers. The just releases Ilford "Galerie" seems to do much better and is Epson certified.

My HP printers on the other hand are all producing first class prints on any brand of paper I feed them - including both the Ilford papers. I have started using the Ilford stuff because its cheaper then the original HP papers, and is producing the same high quality prints at a much better price.

[Electric Amish]

Personally, I don' think you can go wrong with Lexmark. My 5700 has always been good to me.

amish