[Tristrami]

I'm looking to get a photoprinter for that's OS X compatible somewhere in the neighborhood of 5x7 or 4x6. I'm doing several events where there will be a photography component the subjects of the photos will can chose a photo from 5 or 6 digital camera shots. Consequently, I'd like to use iPhoto to do this. Quality should be decent--I'm using a 2.1MP camera, so resolution is pretty good.

Any recommendations? I'd like to try to keep my costs under $150. This is what I'm leaning towards:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/digital/printers/ppm200/

[OldManMac]

Epson Photo 820 is the one, for my money! I do a fair amount of photo printing and the Epson's are hard to beat for that purpose!

[Paul S]

I agree. Epson rules the photo printer market. My Photo 870 (predecessor to the 820) works perfectly in OS X and has outstanding print quality.

[winky]

I have had god luck with the HP Photo Smart P1000. I can simply pull the media card from my camera, insert it into the printer, print an index, and print the photos I want.

The current drivers for OS-X are a little shakey, something that HP says they are working on. But other than that, a fine product.

[dav]

compare the epson with the canon s800, i found the canon to be superior. excellent macosx/9 compatibility.

[Justin W. Williams]

Originally posted by dav:
<STRONG>compare the epson with the canon s800, i found the canon to be superior. excellent macosx/9 compatibility.</STRONG>

I second that. I love the s800 I got for my parents at Christmas. I use it more than they do

Avoid HP's. I think their flesh tones suck.

[goatnet]

It's pricey, but I bought a Canon S900 that is outstanding. It uses 6 cartridges though, so it's a little expensive when you need to buy more ink.

[rambo47]

Recently David Pogue, former columnist at MacWorld magazine and all around Macintosh guru, raved about the Canon S9000 in his Circuits Section column in the New York Times. He stated that the S900 is the same printer as the 9000 but without the large format capability. The Canons allow you to change an individual color cartridges, saving you money compared to Epson. With Epson when any one color runs out you must replace the entire cartridge containing all the colors in one housing. Wasteful and expensive! Also the Canon was a speed demon compared to the Epson. While I have always had good luck with Epson printers (currently using a Stylus Color 880) my next printer will definitely be a Canon.

[lavar78]

I have the Canon S820 - it's great. No complaints.

[driven]

I've had great luck with my HP 932C over the years. (And it *STILL* prints terrific pictures!)

My wife has a Lexmark which prints decent (not QUITE as good as the HP, but close). The problem with the Lexmark is that it uses ink like crazy. (Tons and tons of ink ... very expensive per page.)

Now: While I love my HP printer, I'd like to look elsewhere for my next model. With the big fiasco going on with this merger, and my horrific experience with my HP laptop I'm convinced that HP is a company that's spinning out of control at the moment. I'll avoid them for a bit and MAYBE try them again in about 4 or 5 years when the dust settles.

[nana2]

Originally posted by rambo47:
<STRONG>Recently David Pogue, former columnist at MacWorld magazine and all around Macintosh guru, raved about the Canon S9000 in his Circuits Section column in the New York Times. He stated that the S900 is the same printer as the 9000 but without the large format capability. The Canons allow you to change an individual color cartridges, saving you money compared to Epson. With Epson when any one color runs out you must replace the entire cartridge containing all the colors in one housing. Wasteful and expensive! Also the Canon was a speed demon compared to the Epson. While I have always had good luck with Epson printers (currently using a Stylus Color 880) my next printer will definitely be a Canon.</STRONG>

Indeed. Not to forget that the Canon was over 5 times faster (IIRC) in printing a photo. Which is nice if you have someone standing there waiting for the print.

[Tristrami]

but the Canon S9000 costs $500!

I believe I said I'd like to keep it UNDER $150.

[nana2]

The S9000 is an A3 printer. The S900 is the A4 version.

[robby818]

i like my $90 HP920c. It prints great images and the ink cost is pretty low. For some reason the 920 has gotten better reviews than some of the more expensive HP inkjets. If i had $300 I would have gotten the canon s900.

[Tristrami]

robby:

Are you printing phots with your 920? At what resolution? And does it have drivers for OS X?

[ 04-29-2002: Message edited by: Tristrami ]

[ 04-29-2002: Message edited by: Tristrami ]