I want something that prints decent color graphics, will accept ink refills
without clogging up, and spits out letters and other mundane b/w stuff
pretty quickly. I remember my old Epson Stylus was a workhorse that lasted
for years without any type of fail. I switched to an expensive Canon for a
particular project I was working on, but the head is screwed up on it and I
just want to switch back to a cheapo that will last. Suggestions?

BG

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:38:06 -0400, "B.G." <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>I want something that prints decent color graphics, will accept ink refills
>without clogging up, and spits out letters and other mundane b/w stuff
>pretty quickly. I remember my old Epson Stylus was a workhorse that lasted
>for years without any type of fail. I switched to an expensive Canon for a
>particular project I was working on, but the head is screwed up on it and I
>just want to switch back to a cheapo that will last. Suggestions?
>
>BG
>


I would suggest the lexmark Z65. 4800x1200 Very fast and with the
proper paper, prints very nice prints. Ignore what the reviews say
about washed out pictures, its a bunch of balogna. With quality ink,
paper and calibration of equipment, it yeilds fantastic results.

Kodak premium, not ultra, but preimum paper is the best. Also, office
select premium is very very good. You can not see one single line pass
with a naked eye.

As far as refilling, absolutely nothing is easier. Pop out the
cartridge, pry open the color cartridge with a screwdriver via the
slot hole made for it, inject your ink, snap the lid back on and
install it.. Done in 1 min or less if you have your ink already drawn
out in syringes. By far the simplest cartridge to fill.

For the black, make another vent hole by the sponge, not the raised
top vent hole and inject ink there. If you see any signs of bleeding
out the nozzle while filling, stop and retract some ink so it stops
dripping on its own. Seal the hole with good tape so its air tight.

Auto paper sensing, auto cartridge aligning, dual paper trays super
fast black printing extremely affordable.

They have been selling for 70 USD shipped on ebay.

good luck..

booger wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:38:06 -0400, "B.G." <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>
>>I want something that prints decent color graphics, will accept ink refills
>>without clogging up, and spits out letters and other mundane b/w stuff
>>pretty quickly. I remember my old Epson Stylus was a workhorse that lasted
>>for years without any type of fail. I switched to an expensive Canon for a
>>particular project I was working on, but the head is screwed up on it and I
>>just want to switch back to a cheapo that will last. Suggestions?
>>
>>BG
>>
>
> I would suggest the lexmark Z65. 4800x1200 Very fast and with the
> proper paper, prints very nice prints. Ignore what the reviews say
> about washed out pictures, its a bunch of balogna. With quality ink,
> paper and calibration of equipment, it yeilds fantastic results.
>

I do not recommend this line period. I have the Z55, a model very
similar to the Z65 (even uses same cartridges). Less than average
print quality and poor in photos - yes, washed out unless you
drastically over compensate with photo editing software. Also new
cartridges are very expensive. And there is almost no adjustments you
can make in the printer properties. A very primitive printer.

I strongly suggest one of Canon's latest, the i850. The i850 and the
more expensive i950 are probably this newsgroup's most popular printers.
There have been virtually no complaints with them and no one has yet
reported a clog. I personally can't find a fault, it does everything
perfectly, quietly, smoothly, and fast. I'd buy another i850 without a
second thought, maybe even the more expensive i950.

-Taliesyn

booger wrote:

>Im not sure if the i850 or 950 qualify as "EL CHEAPO" printers as the
>original posted inquired about.

The Canon i850 and Lexmark z65 are not that far about in price. In
Canada the z65 goes for about $170 and the i850 is $210. The difference
in photo print quality is dramatic and well worth the extra $30. The
less expensive Canon i550, which is also a much better printer, sells
for $170.

> I have read several posts about clogs
>with them.

Where have you read that?

I have an i850 and it hasn't clogged once. It sat idle for over a week
at one point and still didn't clog. A friend has the i550 and too has
been perfect and clog-free.

I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that I've yet to find a post
about it. I googled for info about the i550 and i850 before purchase,
and I never came across any negative comments.

>yes the cartridges are expensive but I refilled my set for over a year
>now. That would be approximately 12 refills. I dont know anything else
>thats more economical.

It might be fairly cheap to run with refills, but so is the Canon line
with the ink tanks. In fact it's so cheap, I plan to switch my Canon
35mm film SLR to a Canon digital SLR (so I can keep my investment in
Canon lenses) and print my own photos. With refills and photo paper from
Office Depot, I can make lab-quality prints cheaper than any photo lab.

How's that for economical?

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 02:18:42 -0400, Bill <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>booger wrote:
>
>>Im not sure if the i850 or 950 qualify as "EL CHEAPO" printers as the
>>original posted inquired about.
>
>The Canon i850 and Lexmark z65 are not that far about in price. In
>Canada the z65 goes for about $170 and the i850 is $210. The difference
>in photo print quality is dramatic and well worth the extra $30. The
>less expensive Canon i550, which is also a much better printer, sells
>for $170.
>
>> I have read several posts about clogs
>>with them.
>
>Where have you read that?
>
>I have an i850 and it hasn't clogged once. It sat idle for over a week
>at one point and still didn't clog. A friend has the i550 and too has
>been perfect and clog-free.
>
>I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that I've yet to find a post
>about it. I googled for info about the i550 and i850 before purchase,
>and I never came across any negative comments.
>
>>yes the cartridges are expensive but I refilled my set for over a year
>>now. That would be approximately 12 refills. I dont know anything else
>>thats more economical.
>
>It might be fairly cheap to run with refills, but so is the Canon line
>with the ink tanks. In fact it's so cheap, I plan to switch my Canon
>35mm film SLR to a Canon digital SLR (so I can keep my investment in
>Canon lenses) and print my own photos. With refills and photo paper from
>Office Depot, I can make lab-quality prints cheaper than any photo lab.
>
>How's that for economical?


Oh great... maybe I will try one. Hey we can also rename this the
"Canon users only group" since any suggestions or comments other than
canon "I" series dont cut it.

can anyone comment on why an s330 photo would clog?

--
Ian Lincoln
I am dyslexia of borg your ass will be laminated
"Bill" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:7KJWa.1569$(E-Mail Removed)...
> booger wrote:
>
> >Im not sure if the i850 or 950 qualify as "EL CHEAPO" printers as the
> >original posted inquired about.
>
> The Canon i850 and Lexmark z65 are not that far about in price. In
> Canada the z65 goes for about $170 and the i850 is $210. The difference
> in photo print quality is dramatic and well worth the extra $30. The
> less expensive Canon i550, which is also a much better printer, sells
> for $170.
>
> > I have read several posts about clogs
> >with them.
>
> Where have you read that?
>
> I have an i850 and it hasn't clogged once. It sat idle for over a week
> at one point and still didn't clog. A friend has the i550 and too has
> been perfect and clog-free.
>
> I'm not saying it isn't possible, just that I've yet to find a post
> about it. I googled for info about the i550 and i850 before purchase,
> and I never came across any negative comments.
>
> >yes the cartridges are expensive but I refilled my set for over a year
> >now. That would be approximately 12 refills. I dont know anything else
> >thats more economical.
>
> It might be fairly cheap to run with refills, but so is the Canon line
> with the ink tanks. In fact it's so cheap, I plan to switch my Canon
> 35mm film SLR to a Canon digital SLR (so I can keep my investment in
> Canon lenses) and print my own photos. With refills and photo paper from
> Office Depot, I can make lab-quality prints cheaper than any photo lab.
>
> How's that for economical?

booger wrote:

>>> I have read several posts about clogs
>>>with them.
>>
>>Where have you read that?
>
>Oh great... maybe I will try one. Hey we can also rename this the
>"Canon users only group" since any suggestions or comments other than
>canon "I" series dont cut it.

I asked for validation of your comment about clogging. You haven't done
that, which makes your comment somewhat specious.

No one here is saying Canon is the end-all, be-all of printers, least of
all me. Until just this past spring, I was an HP fan for many years. I
still am for business use, with a laser of course.

But when it comes to a relatively inexpensive photo-quality inkjet with
great performance and features, you'd be a fool to ignore the i850. This
group has caught on to that fact and it has labeled the i850 as "highly
recommended". Other groups and forums reflect this same popularity,
perhaps there's a reason?

Having said that, you can choose whatever you wish. That's the beauty of
Usenet and the internet as a whole - you can either take it or ignore
it, and no one would be the wiser.

Bill wrote:
> booger wrote:
>
>>>> I have read several posts about clogs
>>>> with them.
>>>
>>> Where have you read that?
>>
>> Oh great... maybe I will try one. Hey we can also rename this the
>> "Canon users only group" since any suggestions or comments other than
>> canon "I" series dont cut it.
>
> I asked for validation of your comment about clogging. You haven't done
> that, which makes your comment somewhat specious.
>
> No one here is saying Canon is the end-all, be-all of printers, least of
> all me. Until just this past spring, I was an HP fan for many years. I
> still am for business use, with a laser of course.
>
> But when it comes to a relatively inexpensive photo-quality inkjet with
> great performance and features, you'd be a fool to ignore the i850. This
> group has caught on to that fact and it has labeled the i850 as "highly
> recommended". Other groups and forums reflect this same popularity,
> perhaps there's a reason?
>
> Having said that, you can choose whatever you wish. That's the beauty of
> Usenet and the internet as a whole - you can either take it or ignore
> it, and no one would be the wiser.

Bill,

I, too, am becoming a fan of the i950. My ESC900 is in its death throes,
having given me what, seven years? good and faithful service. It has NEVER
clogged (yes, I can here the shocked gasps from here!) I bought new when it
was first on the market (I believe it replaced the 600 didn't it?) to
replace my forever clogging 600. I know it was a risk going for another
Epson, but I've not been disappointed. My 895, OTOH, has been nothing but
problematic from day one. It is sitting looking truculently at me from its
position at the other side of the desk. I want the i950 as a replacement for
both, *but* I *NEED* (it's essential) something that will print on banner
paper as I print many 10"x4" panoramic photos and, here in the UK at least,
you cannot buy cut photo paper that size. The only means I had of doing them
on the 895 was with Epson's photo roll paper. That's the only reason I've
not got one sitting on my desk right now.

So can you tell me whether the 850/950 can print on continuous paper?

Thanks

Blessings,

Perdi


--
Perdita X. Dream

Please help us to help you
http://groups.google.com
http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm.
Please note that the reply address is fake.
Keep all posts to the groups as private requests for assistance
(i.e. email/IM) cannot be acknowledged. Thank you.

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:38:06 -0400, "B.G." <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote something
.......and in reply I say!:

I have had two HP printers that gave me heaps of trouble. My father
now has an HP printer (bought without asking me :=<) It's giving heaps
of trouble. Paper feed problems (same as my two HPs from day 1, either
not feeding or feeding multiple sheets) install problems, problems
with the Parallel port. Also, the drivers that came with mine were
strange, so I ended up running the Win drivers until I could grab some
proper ones off the Web. These gave better results, but immediately
began to give trouble with multi-sheet documents (which my Father's
now does all the time).

Their "support" is woeful. I think offshore in some generic
"sweatshop". I was told to download the XP drivers, and to update to
Win NT Fix 6" or something like that......I run Win 98.

And now we, at least in Oz, are being told that HP have made their
cartridges so they are non-reinkable, and cannot be bought cheap
aftermarket. I think that cheap cartridges or reinkability are
essential now.

I use an Epson Stylus (C61 in my case). Installed on the Parallel port
1st up. Runs well. Has never fed a wrong piece of paper. IMO better
colour photo quality than my HP. I can get cheap cartridges, but have
been told I cannot reink.

>I want something that prints decent color graphics, will accept ink refills
>without clogging up, and spits out letters and other mundane b/w stuff
>pretty quickly. I remember my old Epson Stylus was a workhorse that lasted
>for years without any type of fail. I switched to an expensive Canon for a
>particular project I was working on, but the head is screwed up on it and I
>just want to switch back to a cheapo that will last. Suggestions?
>
>BG
>
>

******************************************************************************************
I could never _see_ myself as anything!

Nick White --- HEAD:Hertz Music
Please remove ns from my header address to reply via email
!!
<")
_/ )
( )
_//- \__/