Hello,

I'm about to shell out for an i950, but want to make sure I haven't
overlooked an alternative printer. I'm pretty sure, though, that the
essentials leave me with the i950. Here are my priorities:

- very high quality photo prints (all else being equal, I want to have
to work a bit to be able to tell that it's from an ink-jet);
- max 8x10 size prints (no need for anything larger);
- replaceable print head (clogs on one manufacturer's printer are too
much to take);
- under $300;
- fast would be nice, but isn't as important as quality.

So, is there something other than the i950, that's equal to or better
than it in these respects, under $300?

Thanks,

Todd

Have you looked at the HP Photosmart 7550? It's $299.99. The printheads
are built into the cartridge so when you change cartridges, you are changing
printheads at the same time. Another benefit of the printhead being
built-in to the cartridge is no priming necessary, therefore no wasted ink.
"F. Todd Wilson" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:fa382483-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hello,
>
> I'm about to shell out for an i950, but want to make sure I haven't
> overlooked an alternative printer. I'm pretty sure, though, that the
> essentials leave me with the i950. Here are my priorities:
>
> - very high quality photo prints (all else being equal, I want to have
> to work a bit to be able to tell that it's from an ink-jet);
> - max 8x10 size prints (no need for anything larger);
> - replaceable print head (clogs on one manufacturer's printer are too
> much to take);
> - under $300;
> - fast would be nice, but isn't as important as quality.
>
> So, is there something other than the i950, that's equal to or better
> than it in these respects, under $300?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Todd

"David G. Stinner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<MCOLa.45663$(E-Mail Removed)>...
> Have you looked at the HP Photosmart 7550? It's $299.99. The printheads
> are built into the cartridge so when you change cartridges, you are changing
> printheads at the same time. Another benefit of the printhead being
> built-in to the cartridge is no priming necessary, therefore no wasted ink.


Don't compare Photosmart 7550 to Canon i950. The 7550 prints like the
old s900 and it's tiny cartidges and high prices for them, drive
people crazy. They cannot do pure bordeless photos too.

As to the printhead. Do you know that built-in printheads last the
printers life? They are not the same printheads as in hp printers,
which last one cartdidge and the printheads in nowadays Canons are
user-replaceable, not permanent.

Top printer manufacturers (Canon, Epson) are now using separable ink
tanks with built-in printheads. All I can say is that HP (not to
mention Lexmark) is still one step behind Canon and Epson in
technology.

Built-in printheads waste alomost the same amount of ink as
cartidge-integrated printheads. Not to mention the special waste ink
tank that collects the wasted ink during the printhead cleaning
process and doesn't spoil it in the printer.

Wayne

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)ospam (FredBillie) wrote:
><< From: "F. Todd Wilson" (E-Mail Removed)
>Date: Sun, Jun 29, 2003 3:45 PM
>Message-id: <fa382483-(E-Mail Removed)>
>
>Hello,
>
> I'm about to shell out for an i950, but want to make sure I haven't
>overlooked an alternative printer. I'm pretty sure, though, that the
>essentials leave me with the i950. Here are my priorities:
>
>- very high quality photo prints (all else being equal, I want to have
>to work a bit to be able to tell that it's from an ink-jet);
>- max 8x10 size prints (no need for anything larger);

Read the fine print. You can't get borderless 8x10 on 8x10
paper. That's why I stayed with Epson despite the occasional
need to do a nozzle check and clean which, while a PITA, beats
the hell out of trimming paper! It this don't matter to you then
I think you've found your printer.

--wally.

> 1.8pl vs. Canon's 2pl
> 2800x2800dpi
> 7-colors vs. 6
> direct to CD-R disc print capability (missing in Canon)
> roll paper & auto-cutter (missing in Canon)
> etc.
> http://www.i-love-epson.co.jp/produc...0c/pm980c1.htm


yeah, it's probably the most advanced epson: I have "ordered" it 2
weeks ago and can't wait till I get it.

But is it really faster than i950 ?
i950 also has cd printing module (available also only in japan)
on glossy paper, prints last 10 years on matte 20.
does it print as well as i950 on plain paper?

Wayne

> Read the fine print. You can't get borderless 8x10 on 8x10
> paper. That's why I stayed with Epson despite the occasional
> need to do a nozzle check and clean which, while a PITA, beats
> the hell out of trimming paper! It this don't matter to you then
> I think you've found your printer.
>
> --wally.



If I want to get borderless 8x10", I put 8x10" paper in the tray, set
borderless A4 in the driver and... voila! I have a borderless 8x10"!
It over-prints a little but as you know every borderless mode does it.

Wayne

"wally" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bds2bl$(E-Mail Removed)...> Read the fine print. You can't get
borderless 8x10 on 8x10
> paper. That's why I stayed with Epson despite the occasional
> need to do a nozzle check and clean which, while a PITA, beats
> the hell out of trimming paper! It this don't matter to you then
> I think you've found your printer.

But it says on the box, borderless 8.5 x 11 prints. Not true???

Gary Eickmeier

PS - I just popped for the i950 after looking around in Comp USA. It was
kind of confusing, because you have to get individual ink tanks for the
Canon, which collectively cost more, but you can get the two Epson
cartridges for less, but I have no idea how much ink each cartridge holds.
So I reasoned that at least I can replace only the color I need with the
Canon. On paper, there are more Epson papers available, but I reasoned that
the Canon will print on Epson papers as well, whereas Epsons have a problem
with other papers because of their cold ink injectors. But the main factor
was that the Epson selection sucked big time! There were no sophisticated
new A4 printers! A couple of $129 cheapies, the 820, something like that.
Looked cheap and horrible. The i950 is the newest technology from Canon,
with super fine drop size and six colors. So hey. So how am I doing?

> On paper, there are more Epson papers available, but I reasoned that
> the Canon will print on Epson papers as well, whereas Epsons have a problem
> with other papers because of their cold ink injectors.

I don't recommend using Epson papers with Canon printers. You should
buy some red river and Olympus pictorico papers or Canon pr-101 paper.
Remember NOT to buy kodak papers.

wayne

"Wayne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > On paper, there are more Epson papers available, but I reasoned that
> > the Canon will print on Epson papers as well, whereas Epsons have a
problem
> > with other papers because of their cold ink injectors.
>
> I don't recommend using Epson papers with Canon printers. You should
> buy some red river and Olympus pictorico papers or Canon pr-101 paper.
> Remember NOT to buy kodak papers.

Yes - thanks. I don't much like the Kodak papers anyway.

I'm just remembering one occasion when I went into the Camera Shop with a
sample of my favorite HP paper and asked them to print something from a
digital file on my paper with their Epson printer. Not only did it not work,
the ink was running all over the place, a tragic mess. But I could print on
anything with my HP Photosmart classic printer. So my lesson was that the
Epson cold ink technology is so different that they must require their own
papers to be successful. Then again, all of these people at the aftermarket
paper companies are recommending Epsons. So I just don't know any more. I
just got my Canon i950, and I am very happy, astounded even. But I have yet
to experiment with other papers.

Gary Eickmeier

I
> just got my Canon i950, and I am very happy, astounded even. But I have
yet
> to experiment with other papers.
>
> Gary Eickmeier

I received my Ultra Pro Satin from Red River Paper the other day which I
ordered based on recommendations in this newsgroup. Now I too can recommend
this paper as I am getting excellent results on it with my Canon I850. It is
much more affordable than the paper I was using. I was also pleased to find
that they include a sheet with recommended settings for different brands of
printers.
JP