.
Linkage to Review. Upon reading the review it will be unlikely that you will know any more than if you had followed this section for any length of time. Worth a read if you're not already familiar with the iP4300 though. The review fails to mention that the paper tray capacity is predicated on 18 lb. paper - I don't know anyone who uses thinner than 20 lb. paper. So a more realistic number is around 120 sheets per tray. No mention of the chipped tanks either - though the iP4200 had them as well so I guess PCMag takes it as routine that limits to our use of what we buy are a fact of life and thus no longer worth mentioning... :roll: Nor was it mentioned that the iP4300 has basically the same print quality as the iP5200 for half the price. These kiddies the slick mags have working for them have no perspective whatsoever...
.bh.
Linkage to Review. Upon reading the review it will be unlikely that you will know any more than if you had followed this section for any length of time. Worth a read if you're not already familiar with the iP4300 though. The review fails to mention that the paper tray capacity is predicated on 18 lb. paper - I don't know anyone who uses thinner than 20 lb. paper. So a more realistic number is around 120 sheets per tray. No mention of the chipped tanks either - though the iP4200 had them as well so I guess PCMag takes it as routine that limits to our use of what we buy are a fact of life and thus no longer worth mentioning... :roll: Nor was it mentioned that the iP4300 has basically the same print quality as the iP5200 for half the price. These kiddies the slick mags have working for them have no perspective whatsoever...
.bh.