I only print photos and print everday,so what the best printer for under £130?

For quality of the printouts? and cheap in terms of ink etc?
I will be using 3 party carts
And yes i know £130 is on the cheap side!
Thanks
Steve

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 01:07:41 +0100, steve wrote:

=3DFor quality of the printouts? and cheap in terms of ink etc?
=3DI will be using 3 party carts
=3DAnd yes i know =9C130 is on the cheap side!
=3DThanks
=3DSteve

IMO, no printer under 130gbp is good enough for what you
apparently want to do. In fact, the price of the printer
will not be the most significant cost factor, if you want
to do high-volume printing.

Besides, you haven't given enough information.

How much will you print?

What are your standards for quality?

Who are the prints for -- yourself, for customers, or both?

If you print a lot (100 prints a day and up) and for
customers, then a high end printer will be cheapest in the
long run. EG, a laser with toner-replacement (_not_
cartridge replacement) will probably be best for your
needs. IOW, that situation would call for the kind of
equipment a professional printer uses, and you should go
see what they use (and be prepared to spend close to four
figures.)

OTOH, if your printing is primarily for yourself, and on
the order a couple tens of prints a day at most, one of the
current upper-range Canon, Epson, or Hewlett-Packard
printers will probably be best for you. Canon and Epson
come in multi-tank models, and these ar definitely cheaper
to operate in the long run. But just which printer is best
is a question on which you will get mostly highly
prejudiced advice. I myself like H-P printers because they
have been the most reliable for me, but as far as visual
quality of printing goes, all three brands are equally good
IMO.

FWIW, a couple of local artists who make their own prints
for customers prefer the Canon 950/960, a couple others
prefer the Epson 2100/2200. These printers cost around
$1000 Can and up at the moment, but prices are dropping.
(The model numbers vary by country, BTW.) On this forum,
there have been more complaints about Epsons clogging than
about other makes. Recent reviews on longevity, fade
resistance, etc of the prints indicate that the paper + ink
combination is more significant than the brand of printer.
IE, all the multi-tank, pigment or dye sublimation printers
produce prints that are as good as photographic prints in
these respects, but only if made on the paper(s)
recommended for each brand and using OEM inks. Try to save
on paper and/or ink, and the odds are you will get a
combination that will be inferior in colour and archival
quality.

There has also been a wide range of posts about the
advisability or otherwise of using 3rd party refill inks -
some people swear by them and others at them. Personally,
I've had bad experiences with refill inks and I avoid them,
but then I print mostly b/w text, and the higher cost of
OEM ink is acceptable to me. On this forum, the most
positive reports on refill inks have been for Canon
printers.

Maybe that's enough to go on.

But IMO your desire to print photos every day means that
reliability will be the most important cost factor for you.
A cheap printer will not measure up.


--
Wolf Kirchmeir
If you didn't want to go to Chicago, why did you get on the train?
(Garrison Keillor)
just one w and plain ca for correct e-mail address

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 01:07:41 +0100, steve wrote:

=3DFor quality of the printouts? and cheap in terms of ink etc?
=3DI will be using 3 party carts
=3DAnd yes i know =9C130 is on the cheap side!
=3DThanks
=3DSteve

IMO, no printer under 130gbp is good enough for what you
apparently want to do. In fact, the price of the printer
will not be the most significant cost factor, if you want
to do high-volume printing.

Besides, you haven't given enough information.

How much will you print?

What are your standards for quality?

Who are the prints for -- yourself, for customers, or both?

If you print a lot (100 prints a day and up) and for
customers, then a high end printer will be cheapest in the
long run. EG, a laser with toner-replacement (_not_
cartridge replacement) will probably be best for your
needs. IOW, that situation would call for the kind of
equipment a professional printer uses, and you should go
see what they use (and be prepared to spend close to four
figures.)

OTOH, if your printing is primarily for yourself, and on
the order a couple tens of prints a day at most, one of the
current upper-range Canon, Epson, or Hewlett-Packard
printers will probably be best for you. Canon and Epson
come in multi-tank models, and these ar definitely cheaper
to operate in the long run. But just which printer is best
is a question on which you will get mostly highly
prejudiced advice. I myself like H-P printers because they
have been the most reliable for me, but as far as visual
quality of printing goes, all three brands are equally good
IMO.

FWIW, a couple of local artists who make their own prints
for customers prefer the Canon 950/960, a couple others
prefer the Epson 2100/2200. These printers cost around
$1000 Can and up at the moment, but prices are dropping.
(The model numbers vary by country, BTW.) On this forum,
there have been more complaints about Epsons clogging than
about other makes. Recent reviews on longevity, fade
resistance, etc of the prints indicate that the paper + ink
combination is more significant than the brand of printer.
IE, all the multi-tank, pigment or dye sublimation printers
produce prints that are as good as photographic prints in
these respects, but only if made on the paper(s)
recommended for each brand and using OEM inks. Try to save
on paper and/or ink, and the odds are you will get a
combination that will be inferior in colour and archival
quality.

There has also been a wide range of posts about the
advisability or otherwise of using 3rd party refill inks -
some people swear by them and others at them. Personally,
I've had bad experiences with refill inks and I avoid them,
but then I print mostly b/w text, and the higher cost of
OEM ink is acceptable to me. On this forum, the most
positive reports on refill inks have been for Canon
printers.

Maybe that's enough to go on.

But IMO your desire to print photos every day means that
reliability will be the most important cost factor for you.
A cheap printer will not measure up.


--
Wolf Kirchmeir
If you didn't want to go to Chicago, why did you get on the train?
(Garrison Keillor)
just one w and plain ca for correct e-mail address