Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Maflynn · 08:35 AM

Hey,
I'm looking for a new ink jet printer, and was hoping to get some recommendations here.

I've been using a thermal dye printer for my photos, a Kodak 1400 printer to be specific. The rollers are jamming the paper and the paper/ink is expensive - 80 dollars a box. For what I've doing now, and my budget it makes little sense.

I've been a HP user since day one, so I'll probably be looking towards them first but I want a high quality photo printer that isn't terribly slow and can also do text.

Edit: budget is a consideration, I don't want to spend > 500 bucks or anything like that.

Thanks
Mike

skybolt · Apr 13, 2009, 11:33 AM

I think Canon makes some of the best photo printers out there. Having said that, I have determined that it is better and more economical to simply sign up at any one of many places (Walgreens, Wal-Mart, Costco, Wolf, Ritz, etc.) and simply email the photos to them and let them print them. Been using Walgreens since it is near the house, and they charge $.19 per print (4X6). Other places may be cheaper, but the convenience is worth it to me. Can pick up in less than an hour if I want. I don't think one can hardly print a photo at home for that price. We invested in an inexpensive ($79) Brother laser printer for home use.

egleband83 · Apr 13, 2009, 11:23 PM

I've had great success with the Canon CP510 printers. All of Canon's CP series photo printers are fairly similar and give great results due to the dye-sub process.

If your print size is usually 4x6, they are a great option. You can find them easily for under $100, even on clearance at Wal-Mart / Target from time to time. The CP760 looks like the modern day version of my older CP510s.

Veltliner · Apr 13, 2009, 11:33 PM

Canon just came out with new "pro" printers.

You might be able to pick up the pixma pro 9000 for very little. Good printer.

Epson printers may be problematic if you don't print a lot. Their nozzles are prone to clogging.

Maflynn · Apr 14, 2009, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by egleband83

I've had great success with the Canon CP510 printers. All of Canon's CP series photo printers are fairly similar and give great results due to the dye-sub process.

If your print size is usually 4x6, they are a great option. You can find them easily for under $100, even on clearance at Wal-Mart / Target from time to time. The CP760 looks like the modern day version of my older CP510s.

Thanks but I'm moving away from dye-sub as I'm tired of buying the paper/ink together and it being pricey. I want a printer that does picture and maybe some documents also

Originally Posted by Veltliner

Canon just came out with new "pro" printers.

You might be able to pick up the pixma pro 9000 for very little. Good printer.

Epson printers may be problematic if you don't print a lot. Their nozzles are prone to clogging.

Based on iBook_Steve's post and thread he pointed me too, I am avoiding epson. I am looking into PIXMA Pro9000 and the soon to be released PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II .

I am also including HP into my search list, though I don't have list of models to compare with them yet with the exception of B8850 but so far, I'm a little spooked that I need to buy the ink and print heads. The cost of the ink is outrageously expensive for the HP as well. Where the ink for canon and epson is around 15 bucks for a cartridge HP is over 50% more. I'm not sure if you get more ink or lasts longer but ink cost is a consideration.

Thanks for the suggestions

Maflynn · Apr 14, 2009, 09:43 AM

I'm actually leaning towards the HP printer, it seems under normal circumstances the print heads will last and the cost of the ink is in line with canon/epson. The containers are larger then those of the competitors. I may still wait to see how the new PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II seems to shape up, but that won't be available until May - gives me some time to search out deals and make a decision

OreoCookie · Apr 14, 2009, 11:25 AM

I'm not terribly fond of HP printers anymore (I used to be). I'd also recommend Canon.

Maflynn · Apr 14, 2009, 12:48 PM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

I'm not terribly fond of HP printers anymore (I used to be). I'd also recommend Canon.

I'm not sure if anything has changed since I last bought a printer but I've always had great luck with HP. The printer quality and the quality of the printed output has been great. Its probably been 7 (or more maybe) years since I last bought an printer (other then the kodak 1400) and so things could have changed with HP.

OreoCookie · Apr 14, 2009, 01:11 PM

I've owned several HP laserjets and inkjets. I still use an HP inkjet (OfficeJet K550) and a laserjet (4250) regularly at work. Sometimes the Postscript unit of the laserjet is a bit quirky. Also, perhaps we were unlucky, but after 10,000 pages, the printers guts ate themselves. Regarding the inkjet, the drivers are a bit finicky (e. g. the duplex option is not under Layout, so my default duplex setting does not work for the inkjet printer, arg). The cheaper inkjets are horrible, HP was convinced customers would eventually come to love three-color ink tanks with built-in heads for consumer printers (have a look at printers at around or above $100). Even some slightly more expensive photo printers still use them, I'd always double check. The other manufacturers don't do that (with the exception of their cheapest printers). I don't like that, it's 2009, I don't want to buy a new ink tank, just because I ran out of yellow. So they're not necessarily making bad printers, but I don't like part of their product policies.

I switched to Canon inkjets (back when I was still using them), because of separate inktanks (which were cheap, refillable, etc. etc.) and speed. Plus, Canon supported OS X (I bought it when I used 10.0.3

). Canon inkjets are highly regarded in these forums (as well as others) and I haven't heard of systematic problems like with Epsons. (Ditto for HP, by the way.)

Maflynn · Apr 14, 2009, 01:16 PM

I agree with you whole heartedly with the business practice of providing one cartridge with three colors. Its a poor business decision and I also believe any printer thats under < 100 dollars isn't worth considering regardless of the job it needs to perform. The corners cut to make that machine priced so low means it won't last too long and/or the cost of the ink is proportionally higher.

I'm not anti-canon, or anything. I do like HP but the new PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II that will be hitting the streets in May certainly has my curiosity piqued. Given that either printer is fairly expensive, I plan on taking my time on finding the right printer.