Recommendations?

[Lil' Abner]

I have an HP Deskjet 722C printer that I must have had for 4 years or so
now. It does excellent work and has given me no problems whatsoever. But I
have worked it to death and want to replace it before it dies on me.
What printers are out there now that will do at *least* as good a job as
this one and possibly a little faster. I do a lot of photo quality printing
on glossy photo paper. This thing cost me over $300 at the time but it
appears that quality inkjet printers have come down a lot since that.
I don't want to spend any more than I have to, but I don't want to wind
up with a piece of junk either.
Any suggestions?

 

[Edwin Pawlowski]

I have an HP Deskjet 722C printer that I must have had for 4 years or so
now. It does excellent work and has given me no problems whatsoever. But I
have worked it to death and want to replace it before it dies on me.
What printers are out there now that will do at *least* as good a job as
this one and possibly a little faster. I do a lot of photo quality
printing
on glossy photo paper.

I use an HP6500 at work. Fast, good color. It was about $129 IIRC. While
it is not as high quality as a real photo printer, it does a very good job
on the occasional presentation photo I've done. At least as good as the
722C.

OTOH, I was at Staples yesterday and walked out with a Canon PIXMA IP660D
for photo printing. The manager seemed very knowledgeable about photo
printing and this was his personal recommendation. He is a big fan of HP
printers, but says the Canon is better for photo quality and the individual
ink cartridges save a few pennies too. I've only owned it for 30 hours or
so, but I'm very pleased with the quality. It was $199 and has a $25 rebate
offer until 1/8/06.

Getting back to the manager's comments, he says to use HP paper for and HP
printer, Epson for Epson, but Kodak for Canon by a small margin over Canon
paper. He said the Staples brand paper is good, but not quite as good as
the OEM in most cases.

 

[Bob Headrick]

I have an HP Deskjet 722C printer that I must have had for 4 years or
so
now. It does excellent work and has given me no problems whatsoever.
But I
have worked it to death and want to replace it before it dies on me.
What printers are out there now that will do at *least* as good a job
as
this one and possibly a little faster. I do a lot of photo quality
printing
on glossy photo paper. This thing cost me over $300 at the time but it
appears that quality inkjet printers have come down a lot since that.
I don't want to spend any more than I have to, but I don't want to
wind
up with a piece of junk either.

You will probably be very surprised on how much printers have progressed
in the last four years. Even the lowest end printers will likely have
better print quality and print faster than your current 722. I like the
All-in-one units, good ones can be found at less than $200.

What features would you like? The 722 is a basic printer. Would you
like card slots for printing directly from camera slots? Do you want to
print full (4 sided) borderless photo's? How much printing do you
expect to do? Would you want to print two-sided automatically (not for
photo's)? For a standalone printer the DeskJet 6540 might meet your
needs. You might also take a look at the Photosmart PSC 2575, an
all-in-one printer. See
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF02a/18972-236251-236261.html
and
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF02a/18972-238444-410635.html.

Regards,
Bob Headrick

 

[George E. Cawthon]

I have an HP Deskjet 722C printer that I must have had for 4 years or so
now. It does excellent work and has given me no problems whatsoever. But I
have worked it to death and want to replace it before it dies on me.
What printers are out there now that will do at *least* as good a job as
this one and possibly a little faster. I do a lot of photo quality printing
on glossy photo paper. This thing cost me over $300 at the time but it
appears that quality inkjet printers have come down a lot since that.
I don't want to spend any more than I have to, but I don't want to wind
up with a piece of junk either.
Any suggestions?

Ha, Ha! You are really living in the past. I
remember a coworker had a 722 from about 8 years
ago. My HP 970 is way more modern and I've had it
for about 5 years and it was introduced before
that. Any HP printer and probably any other
modern printer will do a better job than your 722.
Newer printers tend to be a little less sturdy,
but they are way less expensive, compare $400 for
my HP 970 to $100 for my new Canon. I recently
purchase my first Canon printer a Pixma 4000
because I wanted to print photos and to refill
and refilling Canons is easier and more reliable
than refilling HP's.

Bob Headrick is the resident newsgroup authority
on HP printers, so take his advice on HP printers.
OTOH, any of the Canon Pixma models will be
faster and the photo quality will be higher than
your 722 and much less expensive too. I
personally think that my 970 is superior at color
on plain paper and my Pixma iP4000 is superior at
photos, but both are undoubtedly superior to your 722.

Just look for the feature that you want and pick
something that is under $200.

 

[measekite]

Ha, Ha! You are really living in the past. I remember a coworker had
a 722 from about 8 years ago. My HP 970 is way more modern and I've
had it for about 5 years and it was introduced before that. Any HP
printer and probably any other modern printer will do a better job
than your 722. Newer printers tend to be a little less sturdy, but
they are way less expensive, compare $400 for my HP 970 to $100 for my
new Canon. I recently purchase my first Canon printer a Pixma 4000
because I wanted to print photos and to refill and refilling Canons is
easier and more reliable than refilling HP's.

IT MADE SENSE UNTIL THE REFILLING PART.

Bob Headrick is the resident newsgroup authority on HP printers, so
take his advice on HP printers.

NOPE A RESIDIENT EMPLOYEE/RETIREE OF HP AND NOW IN DA BUSINESS

OTOH, any of the Canon Pixma models will be faster and the photo
quality will be higher than your 722 and much less expensive too. I
personally think that my 970 is superior at color on plain paper and
my Pixma iP4000 is superior at photos,

THAT IS A TRUE STATEMENT. ESPECIALLY DRAFT BUT THE CANON IS GOOD ENOUGH
ON TEXT AND VERY SUPERIOR ON PHOTOS WITH OEM INK.

 

[measekite]

I have an HP Deskjet 722C printer that I must have had for 4 years or so
now. It does excellent work and has given me no problems whatsoever. But I
have worked it to death and want to replace it before it dies on me.
What printers are out there now that will do at *least* as good a job as
this one and possibly a little faster. I do a lot of photo quality printing
on glossy photo paper. This thing cost me over $300 at the time but it
appears that quality inkjet printers have come down a lot since that.

THE QUALITY OF PRINTERS WHEN CONSIDERING RESULTS AND NOT JUST THE
PAPERWEIGHT AFFECT HAS GONE UP.

 

[Lil' Abner]

I use an HP6500 at work. Fast, good color. It was about $129 IIRC.
While it is not as high quality as a real photo printer, it does a
very good job on the occasional presentation photo I've done. At
least as good as the 722C.

OTOH, I was at Staples yesterday and walked out with a Canon PIXMA
IP660D for photo printing. The manager seemed very knowledgeable about
photo printing and this was his personal recommendation. He is a big
fan of HP printers, but says the Canon is better for photo quality and
the individual ink cartridges save a few pennies too. I've only owned
it for 30 hours or so, but I'm very pleased with the quality. It was
$199 and has a $25 rebate offer until 1/8/06.

Getting back to the manager's comments, he says to use HP paper for
and HP printer, Epson for Epson, but Kodak for Canon by a small margin
over Canon paper. He said the Staples brand paper is good, but not
quite as good as the OEM in most cases.

Thanks. I'll read the rest of these replies and go from there.
I've always used the Kodak Premium Photo Paper with my 722c. I tried the
HP paper once but I really couldn't tell any difference.

 

[Lil' Abner]

Ha, Ha! You are really living in the past. I
remember a coworker had a 722 from about 8 years
ago. My HP 970 is way more modern and I've had it
for about 5 years and it was introduced before
that. Any HP printer and probably any other
modern printer will do a better job than your 722.
Newer printers tend to be a little less sturdy,
but they are way less expensive, compare $400 for
my HP 970 to $100 for my new Canon. I recently
purchase my first Canon printer a Pixma 4000
because I wanted to print photos and to refill
and refilling Canons is easier and more reliable
than refilling HP's.

I'm looking at a Pixma ip4200. It appears to me that it has all the
qualities of the fancier ones, except for all the frills. I don't need
fax, card readers, scanner, or any of that stuff. I already have two
scanners and a fax machine. According to the reviews I've read on it, it
does just as well as the higher priced ones but is possibly a little bit
slower. Is that something like your 4000?
BTW, I have a Brothers MFC-420CN that was almost given to me. I scans
well and the fax part works great. It just doesn't print worth a %*#@!
Slow and poor quality.

 

[George E. Cawthon]

I'm looking at a Pixma ip4200. It appears to me that it has all the
qualities of the fancier ones, except for all the frills. I don't need
fax, card readers, scanner, or any of that stuff. I already have two
scanners and a fax machine. According to the reviews I've read on it, it
does just as well as the higher priced ones but is possibly a little bit
slower. Is that something like your 4000?
BTW, I have a Brothers MFC-420CN that was almost given to me. I scans
well and the fax part works great. It just doesn't print worth a %*#@!
Slow and poor quality.

The 4200 replaced the 4000. Uses the new Canon
inks which are supposed to more permanent. Funny
thing, the 4200 is now on sale for about the same
price as the 4000 was. The 5000 was (according to
many) better than the 4000 and it was replaced
with the 5200.

 

[Lil' Abner]

The 4200 replaced the 4000. Uses the new Canon
inks which are supposed to more permanent. Funny
thing, the 4200 is now on sale for about the same
price as the 4000 was. The 5000 was (according to
many) better than the 4000 and it was replaced
with the 5200.

I just ordered the Canon Pixma ip4200 from Tiger Direct, $68.99 after a
$50 rebate. Also ordered extra Black, Magenta, and Yellow cartridges at
$14.99 apiece.
This'll be the first Canon I've had since my old BJC-610. That's been a
loooong time ago... I think I was running Windows 3.1 then...
Thanks to all of you. Since you all pretty much endorsed the Canon and I
didn't start any flame wars, I figured y'all know what you're talking
about!

 

[measekite]

The 4200 replaced the 4000. Uses the new Canon inks which are
supposed to more permanent. Funny thing, the 4200 is now on sale for
about the same price as the 4000 was. The 5000 was (according to
many) better than the 4000 and it was replaced with the 5200.

INCORRECT. THE 5000 WAS NOT BETTER THAN THE 4000 ON PHOTOS BUT BETTER
ON TEXT. THE 4200 REPLACED THE 3000 BASED ON PRICE POINT AND IS
SOMEWHAT SLOWER THAN THE 4000. THE 5200, BASE4D ON PRICE POINT UPGRADED
THE 4000 AND IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE 5000 BUT I HAVE NOT READ COMPARISON
REPORTS TO THE 4000 BASED ON PHOTO RESULTS. IT IS FASTER.

 

[zakezuke]

I just ordered the Canon Pixma ip4200 from Tiger Direct, $68.99 after a

$50 rebate. Also ordered extra Black, Magenta, and Yellow cartridges at
$14.99 apiece.
This'll be the first Canon I've had since my old BJC-610. That's been a
loooong time ago... I think I was running Windows 3.1 then...

The price on the canon ink is reasonable, though a tad more spendy than
the older generation ip4000. Mostly due to the chips.

Text quality from my understanding hasn't improved much in a while.
That's OK because it's always been pretty good and among the cheaper
per page. Photo quality is good. From my understanding the ip5200 the
next step up simply has more nozzles so more is printed per stroke.

While I am curious about the new HP that takes inktanks, i've been
pleased with my ip3000 and mp760. I expect the ip4200 to be more than
adquate for someone who needs a general purpose printer.

 

[Lil' Abner]

I just ordered the Canon Pixma ip4200 from Tiger Direct, $68.99 after a
$50 rebate. Also ordered extra Black, Magenta, and Yellow cartridges at
$14.99 apiece.

Ooops... scratch the $50 rebate. You have to buy a computer too to
qualify for that. Damn, that'll teach me to read the fine print.

 

[Lil' Abner]

I have an HP Deskjet 722C printer that I must have had for 4 years or
so now. It does excellent work and has given me no problems
whatsoever. But I have worked it to death and want to replace it
before it dies on me. What printers are out there now that will do at
*least* as good a job as this one and possibly a little faster. I do a
lot of photo quality printing on glossy photo paper. This thing cost
me over $300 at the time but it appears that quality inkjet printers
have come down a lot since that.
I don't want to spend any more than I have to, but I don't want to
wind
up with a piece of junk either.
Any suggestions?

OK, I wound up with the Pixma ip4200. Once I finally got it set up, I was
impressed. All I've done so far is a couple of test pages on plain paper
and a couple of full size photographs on 8-1/2 X 11 glossy paper. It
looks like it will take a lot of experimenting. For instance, there's
"Photo Paper Plus Glossy" and there's "Glossy Photo Paper" in printing
choices. Like what's the difference? If you pick one of them the
"quality" button remains on "normal", but I changed it to "high". Maybe I
didn't need to. Setting it up was like a jigsaw puzzle. There's no setup
instructions in the manual whatsoever. It tells you how to change ink
cartridges but not how to put them in in the first place. Then there was
this black "thing" wrapped in tinfoil. The print head. No mention was
made of it whatsoever. So you look for a place where it looks like it'll
fit, and turn it every which way until you finally get in snapped in
there. If it's removable, then that must mean it'll wear out some day. No
mention is made of replacing it anywhere in the manual. On my HP the
print heads are right on the cartridges, so they're replaced every time
you change cartridges.
So I'm impressed with the printer, but certainly not with the
accompanying documentation. Even what I've been able to find on their
website.
What is the significance of having two black ink cartridges? Does the
smaller one just "mix" in color printing and the big one is strictly for
black and white documents? It looks like all that kind of thing would be
documented somewhere!
I'll give the printer 5 stars and the documentation a 1...
Thanks to all of you for your suggestions. I think I'm going to be
happy with it.

 

[zakezuke]

What is the significance of having two black ink cartridges? Does the

smaller one just "mix" in color printing and the big one is strictly for
black and white documents? It looks like all that kind of thing would be
documented somewhere!

Big one - Pigmented black for plain paper
Small one - Dye black for photo paper... when black intensity is 80% or
higher so i'm told it uses the dye black, otherwise it mixes cyan
magenta and yellow.

The print head. No mention was
made of it whatsoever. So you look for a place where it looks like it'll
fit, and turn it every which way until you finally get in snapped in
there. If it's removable, then that must mean it'll wear out some day.

It's hard to say why they continue with the removable head, but it is a
thermal technology and light a lightbulb will eventually go out. I had
the pagecount somewhere, but the older ip4000 I estimated it's offical
rated life at the 10 cartridge change area. It costs between 1/2 to
2/3 the value of the printer, and changing it after 10 cartridge
changes only adds $1.25 or so to each cartridge you change. I'm not
sure of the reality of it's life as I know users of older canons are
are still going after years. By the time the head starts to fail one
usually considers a new printer.

 

[George E. Cawthon]

OK, I wound up with the Pixma ip4200. Once I finally got it set up, I was
impressed. All I've done so far is a couple of test pages on plain paper
and a couple of full size photographs on 8-1/2 X 11 glossy paper. It
looks like it will take a lot of experimenting. For instance, there's
"Photo Paper Plus Glossy" and there's "Glossy Photo Paper" in printing
choices. Like what's the difference? If you pick one of them the
"quality" button remains on "normal", but I changed it to "high". Maybe I
didn't need to. Setting it up was like a jigsaw puzzle. There's no setup
instructions in the manual whatsoever. It tells you how to change ink
cartridges but not how to put them in in the first place. Then there was
this black "thing" wrapped in tinfoil. The print head. No mention was
made of it whatsoever. So you look for a place where it looks like it'll
fit, and turn it every which way until you finally get in snapped in
there. If it's removable, then that must mean it'll wear out some day. No
mention is made of replacing it anywhere in the manual. On my HP the
print heads are right on the cartridges, so they're replaced every time
you change cartridges.
So I'm impressed with the printer, but certainly not with the
accompanying documentation. Even what I've been able to find on their
website.
What is the significance of having two black ink cartridges? Does the
smaller one just "mix" in color printing and the big one is strictly for
black and white documents? It looks like all that kind of thing would be
documented somewhere!
I'll give the printer 5 stars and the documentation a 1...
Thanks to all of you for your suggestions. I think I'm going to be
happy with it.

Did you have a quick set up sheet (big fold out)?
If should have been in the package. My 4000 set
up sheet had by-the-number instructions that
showed how to put the head and the cartridges in
the printer.

The big black cartridge (pigmented) is for text,
the smaller black cartridge (dye) is used with photos.

Print settings are largely a personal preference,
however, many papers include a sheet that shows a
basic starting point for setting on various
printer. I always use the normal quality setting,
but it is a personal preference. +

 

[Gary Tait]

There's no setup instructions in the manual whatsoever. It
tells you how to change ink cartridges but not how to put them in in
the first place. Then there was this black "thing" wrapped in tinfoil.
The print head. No mention was made of it whatsoever. So you look for
a place where it looks like it'll fit, and turn it every which way
until you finally get in snapped in there. If it's removable, then
that must mean it'll wear out some day. No mention is made of
replacing it anywhere in the manual.

My 5000 Quick Start Guide (a paper booklet) detailed (enough for me), how
to "assemble" the printer out of the box. I think I had to almost figure
out the lower cassette myself (it wasn't made clear it works printing
surface down), and the PictBridge feature (camera settng).

On my HP the print heads are
right on the cartridges, so they're replaced every time you change
cartridges.

The better Canons are a happy medium that way. The tanks can be easily
refilled and reused, and aftermarket tanks can be purchased (not yet for
the 4200 though), and the head replaced as needed (although you shouldn't
have to, withint in printer's lifetime,cared for), or even removed for
servicing. With HP/Lexmark, you but heads each time you buy a cart, and
even aftermarket carts cost more, as they are reconditioned/filled OEM
carts. Epson are the other extereme, as their head is built into the
printer, and is not intended to be user serviced or replaced.

So I'm impressed with the printer, but certainly not with the
accompanying documentation. Even what I've been able to find on their
website.
What is the significance of having two black ink cartridges? Does
the
smaller one just "mix" in color printing and the big one is strictly
for black and white documents? It looks like all that kind of thing
would be documented somewhere!
I'll give the printer 5 stars and the documentation a 1...
Thanks to all of you for your suggestions. I think I'm going to be
happy with it.

I do agree, generally Canon documentation leaves something to be desired,
although there is supposed to be a setup guide. I wish they'd include at
least a PDF users guide, if not a paper one.

 

[Stan Birch]

I do a
OK, I wound up with the Pixma ip4200. Once I finally got it set up, I was
impressed. All I've done so far is a couple of test pages on plain paper
and a couple of full size photographs on 8-1/2 X 11 glossy paper. It
looks like it will take a lot of experimenting. For instance, there's
"Photo Paper Plus Glossy" and there's "Glossy Photo Paper" in printing
choices. Like what's the difference? If you pick one of them the
"quality" button remains on "normal", but I changed it to "high". Maybe I
didn't need to. Setting it up was like a jigsaw puzzle.

There is really no need to set anything up. I've been using Canon
printers for a number of years now, and haven't found anything that
does a better job of doing everything automatically. The only thing
you have to do is select the kind of paper you are using, and Easy
Photo Print will bypass any of the parameters set in the printer
driver, and provide you will the best output available.

Nevertheless, for best output, the first time you use Easy Photo
Print, go to File > Preferences and select "Quality Priority" and
uncheck "Optimize images automatically". If the latter is left
checked, Easy Photo will attempt to make colour and tonal range
corrections, along the lines of the old corner store film processors.
If you have a photo consisting of large areas of blue sky and water,
it will assume the photo is too blue and attempt to correct it by
adding yellow to compensate. :-( Or magenta to compensate for a
greenscape, etc. :-(

Canon printers don't work with all photo papers; in fact very few
beyond Canon Papers. Kodak paper is absolutely aweful! The ink puddled
and pooled, and made a terrible mess. Although years ago, I recall
that Epson wasn't too bad, the best alternative to Canon Photo Pro, is
the Office Depot stuff. If they are still selling the made-in-Japan
paper, (Premium High Gloss Photo Paper), then it is a great choice,
that comes VERY close in quality to Canon's top Pro paper. Wait for
one of their 2 for 1 sales. I bought a supply of 800 sheets at one of
their sales; so it's been a while since I bought paper, so I can't
comment on what they are selling at the moment. Before I stocked up on
such a large quantity, I bought a small pack and ran off a bunch of
prints to make sure it was okay.

If using non-Canon paper, it's best to run off a few prints, using
each paper setting. On my old S900, matte paper setting worked best;
but on the IP4200 the Photo Paper Pro setting is marginally superior
to the other paper selections with Office Depot Paper.

 

[Lil' Abner]

(e-mail address removed) (Stan Birch) wrote in

Canon printers don't work with all photo papers; in fact very few
beyond Canon Papers. Kodak paper is absolutely aweful! The ink puddled
and pooled, and made a terrible mess. Although years ago, I recall
that Epson wasn't too bad, the best alternative to Canon Photo Pro, is
the Office Depot stuff. If they are still selling the made-in-Japan
paper, (Premium High Gloss Photo Paper), then it is a great choice,

Yes, they have it. After a half hour of trying to create an account with
them, I finally called and ordered by phone. Their "system" says my VALID
address is invalid... go figure.
Thanks for the suggestion... we'll see how it works!

 

[drc023]

(e-mail address removed) (Stan Birch) wrote in


Yes, they have it. After a half hour of trying to create an account with
them, I finally called and ordered by phone. Their "system" says my VALID
address is invalid... go figure.
Thanks for the suggestion... we'll see how it works!

Office Depot still sells what they call Premium High Gloss Photo Paper, but
it isn't the same item as in the past. I believe it is now a swellable
polymer paper which has no moisture resistance. Office Depot Professional
High Gloss Photo Paper (in the black and white container) is a microporous
(or instant dry) sheet and should perform like the old Premium High Gloss.