Looking for a new photo printer

[darkcyber]

Ok, I've had a Canon S900 for several years and it's been great at printing our digital camera photos and scans. I figure by now there is much better technology out there. So, what I'm looking for is an outstanding photo print quality printer.

I'm not looking for any of the extra stuff like card readers...etc. I'm just looking for a printer to hook to a pc and print photos with.

I need suggestions. I just bought an Epson R200, but it has about the same quality as my Canon.

Thanks!

 

[imported_DarkPenguin]

From cheapest to most expensive. Epson R800, Epson R1800, Epson R2400. The R2400 is used by many pro's for their fine art prints.

 

[Peter]

Just get another Canon - the current breed goes 9600x2400 dpi and 1-picoliter dots, with the reliability and low ink cost you're already used to.

 

[imported_DarkPenguin]

That's a good point. If you were happy with your print's lifespan with your old canon you should probably get a new Canon. If you want prints that will last a while get the Epson.

HP ink just costs too much.

 

[Zepper]

I recommend Canon too. Get one of last year's models if you care about ink costs: iP4000, 5000 (both are 4-color photo printers, the 5k has smaller droplets and approximates 6-color printing), 6000D (6-colors) or iP8500 (8-colors, adds true red and true green to the normal 6 colors). They are getting quite scarce except for the 8500. Try eBay - I'd even consider buying used over one of the new models.

.bh.

 

[Peter]

Originally posted by: DarkPenguin
That's a good point. If you were happy with your print's lifespan with your old canon you should probably get a new Canon. If you want prints that will last a while get the Epson.

HP ink just costs too much.

Canon's ink has been improved in the fadeout property, particularly the new 8-series inks used with the latest series printers.

 

[imported_DarkPenguin]

It is a lot better. Still not in HP or Epson's class yet. Which is really too bad because the only printers I have ever liked have been canon. I end up using the epson clogmaster all the time because of Epson's pigment ink.

 

[darkcyber]

Thanks everyone for the suggestions...the Canon has been an outstanding printer. I printed some pictures with it and the Epson R200 and the Epson has better color match to the original photos than my older Canon. As far as the life span...from what I understand when I purchased the S900...it's suppose to have a life span on printed pictures of about 25-30 years+.

 

[imported_DarkPenguin]

Take a look at your prints. See if they are fading.

As to the colors not matching, if you get profiles for your printer you should be able to make the canon and the epson's prints match. (For colors that are in both printers color space.)

 

[darkcyber]

Prints are not fading on the Canon...Plus when I did a comparison I just printed brand new photos with the Canon and the Epson to compare them.

What I'm looking for is a Photo Printer that is as close to photo lab quality as possible, but not in the $1,000 price range...

We take alot of digital photos of our children and I want something that I can print out prints that look like they came from a lab. I know the camera plays a role here...but I want the best possible printout from a printer.

 

[imported_DarkPenguin]

A couple of sites that review printers.

www.steves-digicams.com
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/index.html

 

[Lemon law]

Its my understanding that a pigment based ink will give a photo that is less vibrant colors but will resist fading----be it from exposure to light or ozone--better because the pigment self seals and dulls
when the dye tends to be destroyed.----so the way a print is stored makes a huge difference.

The photopaper chosen is another huge variable. As well as third party software that can alter the way a printer renders colors.-----as well as the use of cheap but high quality non oem inks and cartridges.

I also recommend that any interested can google nifty stuff forums also for really in debth coverage of those issues.

But be warned, the low end Epsons are not noted for study construction, non clogging printheads, or of lasting more than a few years. But Epsons do have their fans in the photorpinting community--especially in the area of B/W prints. But by in large, in the photoprinting forums, its Canon as the hands down favorite but with boos on the new chipped models.

 

[13Gigatons]

The IP5200 is great:

3600 nozzles and 1 picoliter

The iP5200 is another of Canon's 5-color printers that leaves me wondering why I own and use the 8-color i9900. When I see just how good the photo prints look when using only the three primary colors (cyan, magenta and yellow), I don't know why I need those other ink colors, or the added expense. With the 1-picoliter size ink droplets the prints are virtually grainless.

Only downside is the microchip in the cart, if you want to use generic carts then get the IP5000.

 

[darkcyber]

Well, I never was interested in using generic cartridges in my S900, so that's not an issue for me.

As far as fade and all that stuff...that's not a big deal. #1 I'm printing these basically for our family use and I have access to the ones I'm printing. If the print fades after a year or two...just print a new one BTW, the wife usually doesn't keep a print up that long anyways...lol!

I know software is an issue for best color corrections and stuff and paper plays a part...but looking for the best printer and then I'll hash out all the paper and software stuff...probably just keep using what I've already got anyways...Photoshop and Profressional grade glossy paper.

Thanks for the input. Going to return the cheap-o Espon and start looking for a good Canon...I've really been impressed with the one I've got...just figured that surely the newer technology can beat it now.

 

[HDTVMan]

Im assuming the Prints from your home printers are from a digital source like a digital camera or scanner.
Even if the prints fade in a couple years why not just print them again?

If your sending photo's to someone else send them a CD with the pictures as well and let them worry about printing them out in a few years. A blank cd is about a nickle.

I see digital photo albums replacing prints all together pretty soon anyway. Photo Ipod is just generation 1 of that technology. Pretty soon you will have a 15" LCD panel like our laptop screens that is a photo album. It can be cheaply made since it doesnt require 3ms refresh rates.

 

[imported_DarkPenguin]

Are we talking snap shots or fine art? The whole concept of my sister running one of my images through that $40 printer of hers makes me ill.

And I will not be hanging 20 digital photo albums on my walls. Not that they don't have their place.

 

[darkcyber]

I'm talking about printing out digital photo images from my digital camera. Also, printing some scanned images from our old 35 mm days

Right now, looks like the Canon IP8500 is the one to have. Only download I see (which really isn't a big deal) is that it doesn't print directly onto CD/DVD's. Can't believe any new printer doesn't have this option.

Anyway, the Canon IP8500 is about $315.00 at the cheapest I can find...not a bad deal. I paid $350.00 for my Canon S900 when I got it several years back.

 

[Lemon law]

Still don't get this gotta have a cd or dvd drive on the printer itself---I already have a cd burner on one computer and a dvd burner on my other computer. Why do I need such a drive on a printer also so I can pay a bunch more for the printer?

I might see such a need if my only printing tools were the printer and the camera----and I owned no computer. Most people are not there yet and probably never see that as a goal. Render upon computer what computer does well already. Let the printer print and reject un needed bells and whistles that cost more is my position.

But I am game even if I do not see----why would you want a cd or dvd burner on your printer?

 

[Zepper]

Most of the Canons from last year with the bottom paper tray can be modified to print on CD/DVDs if you want. The Eeeewwro versions of them had that feature but it was crippled on ours - the ever-clever nerds out there found a way.. I think Epson must have a US patent on the feature or something. There is a thread or two here about it with a link to instructions.

.bh.

 

[SilentRunning]

Originally posted by: Zepper
Most of the Canons from last year with the bottom paper tray can be modified to print on CD/DVDs if you want. The Eeeewwro versions of them had that feature but it was crippled on ours - the ever-clever nerds out there found a way.. I think Epson must have a US patent on the feature or something. There is a thread or two here about it with a link to instructions.

.bh.

Calling me a nerd now are you

13Gigatons has a link to instructions their signature.

Oh and it appears that Canon is slowly getting the service manuals (the key to unlocking the feature) removed from websites.