Photo Printers?

[Paul_MTS]

I'ved been using the parents printer for a while but now fed up of it being unreliable (regardless of being top range canon) because mum using cartridge refills,

I basically need a printer for under £100 which is going to print good quality pictures. My digi cam is a Canon G5 but for under 100 i doubt i will get a printer to match cam specs.

I was looking at this one which seem good for the money- http/www.comet.co.uk/comet/html/cache/575_292419.html

I'm not fussed about preview screens as I'll go through my computer to print the pictures. Deffinately needs to print good quality photos on photo paper though.

Any suggestions!?

Thanks.

 

[dylema]

The printing resolution they are claiming seems huge. That would be equivilent to a 23 mega pixel camera. That looks like a great printer. I had a look on the canon website and they back up the claim so sounds good to me.

 

[Bloo]

In my experience and in the current photo printer market - it's a waste of money. Quite literally. The quality is ok - but the heads often clog up and you waste buckets loads of ink cleaning and priming the heads again.
The ink is also very expensive and you'll go through it in the blink of an eye.

It's by far cheaper to go to one of the companies (online even) where you can upload or even send your photos and have them printed for next to nothing.

Photobox.co.uk, Bonusprint.co.uk, Directphoto.co.uk, Snapfish.co.uk, Photodeal.co.uk are just some of the hundreds out there.

 

[Paul_MTS]

Although very true, It's not conveint to have to wait to recieve the pictures. But i think it's something i'll consider if I have alot of high quality shots to print off.

It's mainly to take some pics around to mates that don't have computers.

 

[dylema]

It's by far cheaper to go to one of the companies (online even) where you can upload or even send your photos and have them printed for next to nothing.

This is true, often shops near me run specials and print photos for less than what it costs me to buy the paper. I guess they can do this because they print huge volumes and so get the paper and ink really cheap.

 

[greyko]

I'd agree with Bloo.
After paper and ink, not just the one sheet per print, but the ink and paper wasted on cleaning heads, getting through half a photo when one of the ink colours runs out, etc... it's really not any cheaper than getting it printed photographically. Plus, inkjet prints tend to fade. Don't listen to their archival claims. They mean it won't fade if it's kept in complete darkness in a climate controlled room with ideal conditions.

Probably try to find a pro lab rather than a generic minilab chain or whatever too. They deal with professionals who demand the highest quality. And quite often the pro labs are actually cheaper.

 

[Qays]

my dad does wedding photos for clients sometimes, and he uses his hP printer, it is really good quality, with photo paper printing and very clear picture.

 

[Puffer_freak]

Hi Paul!

I myself have a photo printer that came with my camera. It prints incredibly well, and for black and white shots, it's far better than using most printing companies, as they always come out with a blue or purple tinge.

However: It costs you around 40p per picture you print off, which is a hell of a lot when you compare it to some places (I know a place where I can get prints for around 3p each). Also, if you're shopping, you can get them printed at somewhere like Jessops, which you can get them done in 1hour (don't quote me on the Jessops thing...I'm not sure... *shifty eyes*), meaning you have time to do the rest of your shopping, while you wait, wasting very little time