Need help choosing a printer

[Steve Ward]

My wife and I are looking for a general purpose color inkjet printer.
It must be able to print on ledger size (tabloid, 11"x17") paper. It
will be used to print a variety of projects, such as resumes/cover
letters, envelopes, certificates, business cards, vector graphic art,
digital photos and scans, greeting cards, web pages, and black & white
newsletters.

We are looking closely at the Canon i9900, but we've read where you have
to feed it expensive photo paper for good results. (Rightfully so,
since it is classified as a photo printer.) We want a printer that can
use good quality inkjet paper to produce good photos and sharp line art
and text, even at small sizes. Speaking of paper, we read where the
i9900 cannot accept paper thicker than 28 lbs., which would rule out
cardstock, wouldn't it?

I wish we had the funds and the space for two separate printers, but we
don't, so we have to settle for one printer for all our printing needs.
Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance to those who help.

- Steve

 

[SleeperMan]

We are looking closely at the Canon i9900, but we've read where you
have to feed it expensive photo paper for good results.

Each printer must be fed with expensive paper in order to get good results.
You get better results at quality paper with low cost printer than vice
versa...if you want to print photos, then photo paper is the only way to go.
You can't expect really good result on normal plain paper.
In any case, i'm quite happy with mine ip4000, but this is only A4 printer,
so it's too small for your needs... :-(((

 

[Pete]

Canon, Epson or HP inkjets are good choices. I prefer the HP inkjets
because if some thing goes wrong the are easy to repair and spare parts are
readily available. My first printer was a Canon 600, then I had several
Epson's and my main printers are HP. I switched to HP after Epson started to
put chips in their cartridges. Notice I didn't mention Lexmark printers.
Pete

 

[Stevelee]

Canon i9900 is a good printer. There are in fact many good photo paper to choose
from. Have you looked into Costco's Kirkland brand glossy photo paper? That's
one excellent paper to use at $19 for 125 sheets (letter size).

 

[Bob Headrick]

My wife and I are looking for a general purpose color inkjet printer. It must
be able to print on ledger size (tabloid, 11"x17") paper. It will be used to
print a variety of projects, such as resumes/cover letters, envelopes,
certificates, business cards, vector graphic art, digital photos and scans,
greeting cards, web pages, and black & white newsletters.

The HP Deskjet 9650 may be a good match. See:
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF25a/18972-236251-236261-14438-f51-306780.html

Regards,
Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP

 

[SleeperMan]

Canon, Epson or HP inkjets are good choices. I prefer the HP inkjets
because if some thing goes wrong the are easy to repair and spare
parts are readily available. My first printer was a Canon 600, then I
had several Epson's and my main printers are HP. I switched to HP
after Epson started to put chips in their cartridges. Notice I didn't
mention Lexmark printers. Pete

I agree with you about Lexmarks...i'v ehad two (cheap ones)...Carts are damn
expensive.
But, i wouldn't buy HP, too. Their carts are expensive, and they are very
slow when printing photos, like model450Ci, which needs whole 30 minutes to
print A4 photo, while some Canon does same job in just over 2 minutes.

 

[Bill]

I agree with you about Lexmarks...i'v ehad two (cheap ones)...Carts are damn
expensive.
But, i wouldn't buy HP, too. Their carts are expensive,

People continue to say this, but it's simply not true.

While the Canon individual ink tanks are cheaper PER COLOUR, they're not
cheaper when bought in sets of three, which is required if you intend to
print in colour or make photos.

For example, here in Canada a large colour cartridge (#97) for my HP
6540 from Staples is $49.96. Yet an equal set of three Canon ink tanks
is $53.88 (3x$17.96) for about the same page yields.

So when you go to the store and buy a Canon ink tank, you THINK you're
saving money because it only costs you about $20 that one time. But the
next day when the other colours run out and you buy two more of the ink
tanks, you've spent the same amount of money on ink.

Canon is using the ILLUSION of lower individual prices to make is seem
like you're saving money, when in fact you're not. It's all marketing
hype.

and they are very
slow when printing photos, like model450Ci, which needs whole 30 minutes to
print A4 photo, while some Canon does same job in just over 2 minutes.

Before you make blanket statements condemning print speeds, you should
first compare similar models. The 450ci is a mobile printer that's
designed for convenience and portability first, speed second. Of course,
it's not a wide-format printer nor a high-end model like the Canon i9900
either, but we'll ignore those details for now.

As for speed, it's not an issue with any of the brands. There are many
HP printers that can produce a 4x6 photo as fast as 27 seconds, and an
A4 or 8.5x11 in less than 2 minutes.

Compared to my now defunct Canon i850, my new HP 6540 spits out slightly
better 4x6 photos using the same 4 colours, and it does so in about 60
seconds compared to the Canon's 50 seconds. That 10 seconds produces a
better photo though, so I certainly don't mind the minor difference.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=]

Bill wrote:

People continue to say this, but it's simply not true.

While the Canon individual ink tanks are cheaper PER COLOUR, they're not
cheaper when bought in sets of three, which is required if you intend to
print in colour or make photos.

For example, here in Canada a large colour cartridge (#97) for my HP
6540 from Staples is $49.96. Yet an equal set of three Canon ink tanks
is $53.88 (3x$17.96) for about the same page yields.

So when you go to the store and buy a Canon ink tank, you THINK you're
saving money because it only costs you about $20 that one time. But the
next day when the other colours run out and you buy two more of the ink
tanks, you've spent the same amount of money on ink.

Canon is using the ILLUSION of lower individual prices to make is seem
like you're saving money, when in fact you're not. It's all marketing
hype.

Colours don't run out at the same rate, so if they are all in one cartridge then
you're throwing away ink. This makes printers like your 6540 more expensive to
run, because you are replacing the ink cartridge more frequently.

 

[Bill]

Colours don't run out at the same rate, so if they are all in one cartridge then
you're throwing away ink. This makes printers like your 6540 more expensive to
run, because you are replacing the ink cartridge more frequently.

Again, that's just hype from the companies promoting individual ink
tanks, and they're all guilty of that, including HP (see their business
inkjets).

Don't forget I had a Canon i850 for well over a year and I know exactly
how much ink was used per colour during that time. With typical prints,
the colours all run out at pretty much the same times, give or take a
few percent.

Sure there will be some occasions, like printing a lot of photos of blue
skies, where cyan will run out before the other two, but that's rare and
non-typical. If you have a need for that type of printing, then sure,
individual ink tanks are the way to go. But if you're a typical user,
then it doesn't make much difference.

And let's face it, when it comes to photos using a printer with genuine
ink and paper it costs A HECK OF A LOT MORE than going to the photo lab
and having them run off a few dozen prints from a CD.

 

[Dave]

I have just purchased a Cannon Pixma 4000 (amazing speed/great
quality/individual ink cartridges) and have to say I am stunned at the
results - it is simply amazing compared to the awful Epson 810 Photo
(heads blocking/chipped cartridges/poor quality) we had, that said the
build quality could be better - time will tell. I was always a fan of
espon until the 810, I still have a 740 in use that gives good
results. We use a hp 1100 laserjet bought cheap off ebay for general
black and white and is generally trouble free. Haven't had a hp since
the 660 which was rubbish. Lexmark are IMO more trouble than they're
worth.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=]

BenOne© wrote:




Again, that's just hype from the companies promoting individual ink
tanks, and they're all guilty of that, including HP (see their business
inkjets).

Don't forget I had a Canon i850 for well over a year and I know exactly
how much ink was used per colour during that time. With typical prints,
the colours all run out at pretty much the same times, give or take a
few percent.

I've got a Canon i9950 and 2 friends with i865. We all go through the photo
colours MUCH quicker than the rest. It's NOT manufacturer hype.

I've heard plenty of people report the same experience as my friends and I, so
I'm inclined to think you are not a typical user.

 

[Bill]

I've got a Canon i9950 and 2 friends with i865. We all go through the photo
colours MUCH quicker than the rest. It's NOT manufacturer hype.

I got news for you...the i865 does NOT use photo colours.

Your friends are likely just towing the Canon line about individual ink
tanks being more economical, when they're not.

I used to think that maybe Canon was right and individual ink tanks
would be better. But after using the i850 for over a year, I know that
was just one of their many marketing tools to help promote sales.

Many people are like sheep...they just follow the shepherd and will
agree that ink usage is lower and the individual carts are saving them
money. All because Canon, Epson, and HP said so.

I've heard plenty of people report the same experience as my friends and I, so
I'm inclined to think you are not a typical user.

You did not follow the thread properly, as nothing was ever said about
photo inks.

We all know the photo inks are consumed faster than the other three
colours. But we're talking about the three main colours and the typical
consumption levels.

But since you brought up the subject of photo inks, I can tell you that
even though they get consumed faster, once again their usage is fairly
consistent. And using my HP 6540 as an example, the three main colours
and the photo colours are in separate cartridges, so photo ink usage is
not really relevant to the main colours.

Now if all six colours were in one cartridge, then I would agree with
you, and I wouldn't use such a system. But as it stands, it's not an
issue.

 

[SleeperMan]

People continue to say this, but it's simply not true.

While the Canon individual ink tanks are cheaper PER COLOUR, they're
not cheaper when bought in sets of three, which is required if you
intend to print in colour or make photos.

For example, here in Canada a large colour cartridge (#97) for my HP
6540 from Staples is $49.96. Yet an equal set of three Canon ink tanks
is $53.88 (3x$17.96) for about the same page yields.

You forgot to mention that Canon's carts hold much more ink than those at
HP. And i don't have to mention that i usually don't buy all 3 colors, but
separately one one i'm out of.

 

[SleeperMan]

I have just purchased a Cannon Pixma 4000 (amazing speed/great
quality/individual ink cartridges) and have to say I am stunned at the
results - it is simply amazing

Agreed 101 %!

 

[Helena]

Agreed 101 %!

I agree with what the others suggested-it should be a great weekend to
check out some of the after thanksgiving sales-I'd suggest stopping by
staples and see what kind of deals they have in the store or online.

 

[Bill]

You forgot to mention that Canon's carts hold much more ink than those at
HP.

Yes you're right, they do hold more.

But page yield is all that matters when you want to calculate running
costs. And ink volume does not equate to page yield, or the amount of
ink a cartridge holds does not directly equal number of pages. The type
of ink, printhead design, paper formulations, print engine, all affect
page yields.

And i don't have to mention that i usually don't buy all 3 colors, but
separately one one i'm out of.

Yes, but a few days later when you've bought a total of three ink tanks
and spent $50 anyway, you're back at square one.

Hehehe...I know this may not apply, but you do realize that each time
you go out to buy the other two colours, you use more gas to get there
and back?


The whole point of this is that ink usage is not a valid reason to
choose one brand over the other, Canon or HP. Buy the printer that best
suits your needs.

 

[SleeperMan]

Yes you're right, they do hold more.

But page yield is all that matters when you want to calculate running
costs. And ink volume does not equate to page yield, or the amount of
ink a cartridge holds does not directly equal number of pages. The
type of ink, printhead design, paper formulations, print engine, all
affect page yields.


Yes, but a few days later when you've bought a total of three ink
tanks and spent $50 anyway, you're back at square one.

Hehehe...I know this may not apply, but you do realize that each time
you go out to buy the other two colours, you use more gas to get there
and back?


The whole point of this is that ink usage is not a valid reason to
choose one brand over the other, Canon or HP. Buy the printer that
best suits your needs.

When i was up to buy first Canon, i was looking about HP, too. But, then i
decided for Canon and so far i'm not sorry. For one thing, i just read some
reviews about printers and i saw that HP needs whole 30 minutes to print A4
photo, while canon does same job in just over 2 minutes. And better than
HP...In any case, since i refill, Canons are easiest to refill (you must
admit that) and with it, costs are way lowest among all printers. Even with
canon inks, costs (according to review) are cheapest. So....i guess at the
end, each says my is the best and, as you said, you buy what you need...

 

[SleeperMan]

I agree with what the others suggested-it should be a great weekend to
check out some of the after thanksgiving sales-I'd suggest stopping by
staples and see what kind of deals they have in the store or online.

Yep, some are lucky...in USA these printers are about 50% cheaper than
here...but still, from i've seen, ip4000 is best bet. That extra photo black
does wonderfull job indeed!

 

[PC Medic]

Yes you're right, they do hold more.

But page yield is all that matters when you want to calculate running
costs. And ink volume does not equate to page yield, or the amount of
ink a cartridge holds does not directly equal number of pages. The type
of ink, printhead design, paper formulations, print engine, all affect
page yields.

Your point?

Yes, but a few days later when you've bought a total of three ink tanks
and spent $50 anyway, you're back at square one.

Awful big assumtion on your part. I (and most others I know can go weeks
between changing another tank after replacing a different one.

Hehehe...I know this may not apply, but you do realize that each time
you go out to buy the other two colours, you use more gas to get there
and back?

Give me a break! I certainly hope that smiley is an indication of what a
rediculous point this would be (if it were one at all).

The whole point of this is that ink usage is not a valid reason to
choose one brand over the other, Canon or HP. Buy the printer that best
suits your needs.

Which is the one that gives me the best quality print and costs the least to
operate because I can change individual ink tanks.
Hey, that's my Canon!!

 

[Bill]

Your point?

No point...just blathering on about nothing again...