Printers


Diopter

Link Posted 03/04/2013 - 15:12
I am in the market for a new printer, and as there hasn't been anything on the forum for a while on the subject I thought I would resurrect it.
What are the feelings about which are currently the best for photo reproduction?
Any ideas, comments, personal experience or suggestions greatfully received.
Many thanks, Pete.

steven9761

Link Posted 03/04/2013 - 15:23
What size were you hoping to print out, Pete? I'm guessing there's quite a few good A4 printers that give great repro, but fewer in the A3 range. Preference-wise, my own personal choice would be to consider either one from the Canon range, or from HP. Never having printed from anything (domestically, at least) other than those two brands, I tend to stick with what I'm comfortable with.

damperman

Link Posted 03/04/2013 - 15:41
I recently (well about 8 months ago) bought a A3 Epson R3000 printer. Excellent printer. I previously had a Epson 1290 which came to the end of its life.

bettyswolloks

Link Posted 03/04/2013 - 15:49
After my Epson R2400 died I went for the canon ix6550, initially I saw it as a stop gap till my next Epson but I think its a keeper! The print quality is faultless and the B+W performance is equally as good.
I'm happy to recommend it to anyone
I'm only 4fut3, but I look a lot bigger from a distance

Nikon D600, 18-55, 50 F1.8, Sigma 70-200 HSM,180macro.
MZ-7, K-10,K-7, all gripped.
Pentax 35 28-80
Sigma 50 EX Macro.
A sexy little Q with 8.5mm Prime.
And a cup with a gorrila on it, it's also chipped a little, but holds tea perfectly well.

Ranfog Flickr Group

johnriley

Link Posted 03/04/2013 - 16:28
We still have an Epson 1290s which still produces excellent prints. While it does, we'll be keeping it.
Best regards, John

tyronet2000

Link Posted 03/04/2013 - 17:01
bettyswolloks wrote:
After my Epson R2400 died I went for the canon ix6550, initially I saw it as a stop gap till my next Epson but I think its a keeper! The print quality is faultless and the B+W performance is equally as good.
I'm happy to recommend it to anyone

I've got an ix6550 but (probably it's me) was disappointed (darker) with the prints straight from photoshop. When I save as a jpeg then print it from where I've saved to it's usually OK. Only thing I really dislike is the cost of the ink, but I think everyone else feels the same about that.
Regards
Stan

PPG

bettyswolloks

Link Posted 03/04/2013 - 17:22
tyronet2000 wrote:

I've got an ix6550 but (probably it's me) was disappointed (darker) with the prints straight from photoshop. When I save as a jpeg then print it from where I've saved to it's usually OK. Only thing I really dislike is the cost of the ink, but I think everyone else feels the same about that.

I normally print either straight from lightroom, .dng format?, or from a tiff inside of photoshop and all seems ok to my eye here. As for ink, I'm a fan of CISS systems so ink costs aren't really an issue here
I'm only 4fut3, but I look a lot bigger from a distance

Nikon D600, 18-55, 50 F1.8, Sigma 70-200 HSM,180macro.
MZ-7, K-10,K-7, all gripped.
Pentax 35 28-80
Sigma 50 EX Macro.
A sexy little Q with 8.5mm Prime.
And a cup with a gorrila on it, it's also chipped a little, but holds tea perfectly well.

Ranfog Flickr Group

Diopter

Link Posted 05/04/2013 - 11:56
Many thanks for the advice etc. Am doing a bit of price surfing and comparing brands.
Is there such a thing as a printer dedicated to photo reproduction?
The HP I have is great for text etc. but photo quality is not brill.
I am using genuine HP cartridges and good quality paper but get banding and blurring and colours are not representative of the screen image.
Still not sure yet which way to go, keeping the nose to the stone.
Pete

johnriley

Link Posted 05/04/2013 - 12:25
There are indeed photo printers, such as Epson and lots of other makes.
Best regards, John

screwdriver222

Link Posted 05/04/2013 - 14:18
I haven't printed anything for about 10 years and I found the print would fade over time (say a couple of years). Has this improved or is it best to get prints done by a shop.

Regards

Jeff
Flickr link
Last Edited by screwdriver222 on 05/04/2013 - 14:19

johnriley

Link Posted 05/04/2013 - 14:21
It's improved a lot Jeff. We don't put pictures in direct sunlight, but now prints several years old are holding their colour just fine.
Best regards, John

Aero

Link Posted 05/04/2013 - 14:31
My last three printers have been Epson Stylus Photo A4 models and the results are spectacularly good -- certainly as good as a lab. I've no reason to doubt the latest one in the series, the P50, is just as good. It's about 100. I use Epson ink (hugely expensive) and paper, but I have used compatible inks from Premier Ink in the past and I couldn't tell the difference. Maybe go back to these.

On the longevity front, a few of my prints have been on a wall for about six years and there's no sign of fading. This may not be the case with compatible inks.

I'd love an A3 printer but the running costs are high (unless you go CISS) and it's cheaper to farm out the printing.

Good luck in your search.

Al

tyronet2000

Link Posted 05/04/2013 - 14:49
bettyswolloks wrote:

I normally print either straight from lightroom, .dng format?, or from a tiff inside of photoshop and all seems ok to my eye here. As for ink, I'm a fan of CISS systems so ink costs aren't really an issue here

Looked at one ix6550 CISS system on utube, it looked a bit messy to set up and the printer would need more space. Is there a system/supplier you would reccommend ?
Regards
Stan

PPG

Blythman

Link Posted 05/04/2013 - 14:58
I'd just recommend going into it with your eyes open Stan.

I bought a CISS system for an Epson printer I had. Bought the printer new. Heads were blocked within a very short space of time and I was unable to unblock them with any satisfaction. Ended up throwing a 6 month old printer in the bin.
Alan


PPG
Flickr

SkyRider

Link Posted 05/04/2013 - 15:00
While we're on the subject of printers, I've got a related question. I used to have one but used it so sporadically that the cartidges tended to dry up between prints - at the same time, even though it ended up more expansive than using a lab given my low-volume printing, the instant response meant I could send relatives away with prints of the weekend when they came to stay.

Is there some way to stop the inks from drying? Or is colour laser technology likely to become good enough for photos any time soon?

Cheers,
Paul
Flickr
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.