Lexmark Z640

[species8350]

I am considering this printer

I note that it does not come with a black cartridge as standard.

Seems a bit of a disadvantage. Can it print in black as standard. If
so, why is a balck cartridge offered as an option. If not, what
happens when it comes to text?

Thanks

ps. Would you recommend the printer (for occasional use, few
graphics). Are the cartridges chipped?

 

[measekite]

Canon and
Epson makes good printers with HP not too far behind.  Lexmark is an ink dispenser.

davy wrote:

I never know with Lexmark if it's cheaper buying a new set of inks or a new printer... here's one or two user reviews 'Lexmark Z640' (http://www.ciao.co.uk/Reviews/Lexmark_Z_640__6501239) If its black you are going to print why not get an 'El cheapo' laser? I used a cheap Samsung for ages and refilled toner til the drum wore out and ended up with a dear model.... you don't get clogs with them Lexmark now makes printers for Dell. davy

 

[Frank]

measekite wrote:

....SPAMMER!!!
Idiot!
Frank

 

[Aftermarketink]

Canon and Epson makes good printers with HP not too far behind.  Lexmarkis an ink dispenser.

This is not true...

HP is the market leader in inkjet and laser printers.

As far as business applications HP is easily the best...and for photos
Epson is the best. Canon is very good at both but not a master at
either. HP has better photo printers than Canon as far as fade
resistance and overall quality and speed. When you use aftermarket
inks with your Canon such as the IP4000 you can save a bundle.

 

[measekite]

[email protected] wrote:

On Jan 22, 11:43 am, measekite <[email protected]> wrote:



Canon and Epson makes good printers with HP not too far behind.  Lexmark is an ink dispenser.





Absolutely TRUE

snip


. HP is the market leader in inkjet and laser printers.

HP has been in it the longest.  They are also market leader in PCs but they also made a deal with Wild Tangent aka Gator (the adware company) so they can offer free games and other crapware.  Who would want the adware company on their PC.


As far as business applications HP is easily the best...and for photos

Canon


Epson is

NOT


the best.

except for possibly the Epson 3800


Canon is very good at both but not a master at either. HP has better photo printers than Canon as far as fade resistance and overall quality and speed.

Totally smoke and mirrors.  Canon produces the fastest print with the best quality and reasonable fade resistance.  One problem with HP is they have poor Windows drivers and poor windows software.


When you use aftermarket inks with your Canon such as the IP4000 you can save a bundle.

Like I said before you do not save anything since you get less.  You can only really save on ink when you can get the exact same brand of ink from one vendor for less than from another.  Like if you buy Canon ink at costco you will pay a little less than at Staples.  The bad thing is that the price is somewhat controlled in the ink business.

 

[Frank]

measekite wrote:

 

[Aftermarketink]

Take your money and by a quality HP. Most of the other OEM's are just
try to copy HP and or Epson. HP provides the best print quality and
the best cost per page...especially if you use aftermarket ink.
Unfortunetly Canon and Lexmark are not there yet. Canon just does not
produce the best photos and/or text. As stated above Epson produces
the best photos and HP the best text...PERIOD

 

[measekite]

Take your money and by a quality HP. Most of the other OEM's are just
try to copy HP and or Epson.

Canon came out with individual carts way before HP did and HP has them
on limited models.

HP provides the best print quality and
the best cost per page... Not true and specifically
especially if you use aftermarket ink.
Unfortunetly Canon and Lexmark are not there yet. Canon just does not
produce the best photos and/or text.

All of the professional reviews give Canon editors choice. I would
probably choose Epson as a second choice if I wanted to print photos.

 

[Aftermarketink]

The people have spoken...HP the # 1 selling printers PERIOD. Canon
said generic ink is as good as thiers...we all know how good generic
ink is.

 

[PhotoSci]

Look into the new ink jet printers from Kodak if you're interested in
an All-In-One. Their pigmented inks have good permanence, excellent
color fidelity, and cost about half as much per page as other
manufacturers' inks. Their business model is not to sell the printers
at a loss and then make up for it in high ink prices--and after all,
ink is what you buy most of.

If you really only want to do B&W, then a laser printer is the way to
go. You'll get excellent text even at small point sizes and the
cheapest per page consumables by far. We've been happy with several
Brother lasers, but HP and others have good products as well. On the
Brother models we have, the toner catridge and drum are separate, so
you can replace several toner cartridges before the drum needs
replacing. We've found that after market toner from well-established
companies (for example, Verbatim) brings cost per page down even
further with no loss in quality.

 

[measekite]

Look into the new ink jet printers from Kodak if you're interested in
an All-In-One. Their pigmented inks have good permanence, excellent
color fidelity, and cost about half as much per page as other
manufacturers' inks. Their business model is not to sell the printers
at a loss and then make up for it in high ink prices--and after all,
ink is what you buy most of.

You throw away a lot of color ink. The ink mileage is not that great.
The printers cost too much and cannot match Canon quality.

 

[Aftermarketink]

Look into the new ink jet printers from Kodak if you're interested in
an All-In-One. Their pigmented inks have good permanence, excellent
color fidelity, and cost about half as much per page as other
manufacturers' inks. Their business model is not to sell the printers
at a loss and then make up for it in high ink prices--and after all,
ink is what you buy most of.

From what I have seen the new Kodak are ok. But if you run out of 1
colour in the colour cartridge the whole cartridge is useless. The
quality of the print is about the same as a Canon IP4000/IP4500. And
the Kodak prints would probaly be more fade resistant. If your looking
for a lower CPP and better print quality then you should look at a HP
K5400.