Which printer to buy?

Hi

I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would appreciate input.

Harry

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

Do not get multi-use anything...they don't do anything very good.

I would stay away from the Canon bubble-jet printers...know why they call them "bubble-jet?" They BOIL the ink in order to get it to flow better through the nozzles. Common sense should tell you that boiling the ink is also going to break down it's life, and ink has enough problems as it is.

If you want prints to equal your very good camera then get an Epson something. The C80 at $150 is as cheap as you will find and get quality and a reasonable speed. The C60 is half the price but takes twice as long to print. There are other better choices though ( I think!) Read reports in magazines like eDigital Photo and Shutterbug. DO NOT pay attention to reviews in magazines like PC World and Consumers Reports. You want PHOTO quality and they do not know how to get it!

The real challenge is the printer set up and calibration and monitor calibration plus the profiling of settings for different papers. Only use the BEST paper as well, such as Lumijet Preservation Series and Pictorico.

It is not as simple as buying "the best printer." All of the aforementioned things must be working together in order for you get get "the best print."

If you want quality photo prints, you will probably have to stay with a photo printer. Yes, the Canon S800 is one of the better photo printers out right now. It offers, ease in maintenance, lower cost per page and an exceptional photo print.

Epsons offer exception photo prints as well, but ... be aware of the clogs, magenta cast, and pizza wheel tracks, as well as the wasted ink in the carts.

HP's offer good versatile printers which you may want to look as well. Good luck .....
--Bobby Lee

Mr.Obvious said:

Do not get multi-use anything...they don't do anything very good.
I would stay away from the Canon bubble-jet printers...know why
they call them "bubble-jet?" They BOIL the ink in order to get it
to flow better through the nozzles. Common sense should tell you
that boiling the ink is also going to break down it's life, and ink
has enough problems as it is.

Click to expand...

And this means so much more than the actual print quality and real life experience? Common sense should tell you that if the experts making the printers saw a problem, they would use different technology. The ink used by the S800 lasts a very long time.

Mr.Obvious said:

If you want prints to equal your very good camera then get an Epson
something. The C80 at $150 is as cheap as you will find and get
quality and a reasonable speed. The C60 is half the price but takes
twice as long to print. There are other better choices though ( I
think!) Read reports in magazines like eDigital Photo and
Shutterbug. DO NOT pay attention to reviews in magazines like PC
World and Consumers Reports. You want PHOTO quality and they do not
know how to get it!

Click to expand...

If photo quality is your concern, why aren't you recommending photo printers instead of average printers like the C80 and C60?

You won't come close to S800 photo quality with a multi function printer. You can always get the scan head to use in the S800 if you need it, but dedicated hardware is better.

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

Your knock on Canon printers is just well....... STUPID!

By the way the printers you recommend are only 4 color as opposed
to 6 color.

I have a G2/S800 combo and it's been nothing short of stunning!

Mr.Obvious said:

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

Do not get multi-use anything...they don't do anything very good.
I would stay away from the Canon bubble-jet printers...know why
they call them "bubble-jet?" They BOIL the ink in order to get it
to flow better through the nozzles. Common sense should tell you
that boiling the ink is also going to break down it's life, and ink
has enough problems as it is.
If you want prints to equal your very good camera then get an Epson
something. The C80 at $150 is as cheap as you will find and get
quality and a reasonable speed. The C60 is half the price but takes
twice as long to print. There are other better choices though ( I
think!) Read reports in magazines like eDigital Photo and
Shutterbug. DO NOT pay attention to reviews in magazines like PC
World and Consumers Reports. You want PHOTO quality and they do not
know how to get it!
The real challenge is the printer set up and calibration and
monitor calibration plus the profiling of settings for different
papers. Only use the BEST paper as well, such as Lumijet
Preservation Series and Pictorico.
It is not as simple as buying "the best printer." All of the
aforementioned things must be working together in order for you get
get "the best print."

Click to expand...

It took a while for HP and Canon to catch up with the Epson photo printers, but catch up they did. I have both the epson 700 and 1200, and while their print quality has been very good to excellent, I would not buy another ink jet printer for photo printing, epson or otherwise. You should seriously consider buying a good low cost dye-sub printer. The Sony sv55 (4x6) for around $300, or if you can afford it, the Olympus P-400 (7.64x10) is even better, for around $650. No dots here folks, and the quality is superb, and and the pictures will last a lifetime.

dgrogers said:

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Just curious as to how you know how long the Canon inks will last. The printer is relatively new. Is this based on someone's research? Not questioning Canon's quality, just seeking knowledge.

Jim

dgrogers said:

And this means so much more than the actual print quality and real
life experience? Common sense should tell you that if the experts
making the printers saw a problem, they would use different
technology. The ink used by the S800 lasts a very long time.

If photo quality is your concern, why aren't you recommending photo
printers instead of average printers like the C80 and C60?

Click to expand...

Jim, the Canon S800 is a newer model of the 8200. Both can use the ink that "when framed under glass, images may retain their brilliance for approximately 25 years" .. "† Based on Canon and Wilhelm Imaging Research studies conducted using Photo Paper Pro under glass with a layer of air, and industry fluorescent lighting conditions".
Hope this helps.
--Mike

Thanks for the info, Mike.

Jim

Mike Ditta said:

Jim, the Canon S800 is a newer model of the 8200. Both can use the
ink that "when framed under glass, images may retain their
brilliance for approximately 25 years" .. "† Based on Canon
and Wilhelm Imaging Research studies conducted using Photo Paper
Pro under glass with a layer of air, and industry fluorescent
lighting conditions".
Hope this helps.

--
Mike

Click to expand...

Just thought I would stick my two cents in about printers; I have owned a BJC8200 for a year and am very satisfied. Ink usage is lower than any of the other inkjets and the quality is great with "only canon paper". Don't even think about trying other paper the results are horrible. I've tryed every setting possible and no dice. If I had plenty of disposable $ I would try the the Oly printer.

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

--Ed D

Ed Decker said:

the quality is great with
"only canon paper". Don't even think about trying other paper the
results are horrible. I've tryed every setting possible and no
dice.

Click to expand...

That simply is not true. I highly recommend Konica QP, which looks every bit as good as PPP (using my 8200). Other people like Red River or other brands. The only brand that you may want to stay away from is HP and Kodak.

Speaking from experience. I own the 8200 and have been using the new ink since they came out (Canon sent me a free set when the S800 was first hitting the stores). I don't take any special precautions with the prints either.

This one!

http://www.canon-sales.co.jp/bj/lineup/f9000/index-j.html

Now, how does one actually go about acquiring one?!?!?

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

dgrogers said:

Ed Decker said:

the quality is great with
"only canon paper". Don't even think about trying other paper the
results are horrible. I've tryed every setting possible and no
dice.

Click to expand...

That simply is not true. I highly recommend Konica QP, which looks
every bit as good as PPP (using my 8200). Other people like Red
River or other brands. The only brand that you may want to stay
away from is HP and Kodak.

Click to expand...

I second that on the Konica paper, with my s800...it's great.

Have any of you had any luck with the Epson heavyweight matte and the 800? I'm leaning towards this printer but would like to hear from other users how this combo turns out.
Danny--danny

dannyjl said:

Have any of you had any luck with the Epson heavyweight matte and
the 800? I'm leaning towards this printer but would like to hear
from other users how this combo turns out.
Danny
--
danny

Click to expand...

I had some of the paper left from my 870 use. It's ok but I found it had a slight magenta cast...both papers. Since the price of OD's paper (konica) is so good along with the results, I prefer it. Just picked up a pack of 100 on sales yesterday for 29.99...hard to beat.
regards...i.j.

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Well it certainly is obvious to Mr.Obvious that most of you only read or see the words that you want to see!

I did not reccomend a C80, I said it was the LEAST EXPENSIVE printer that would get the job done and the C60 was half as fast, but there WERE BETTER CHOICES!!!

For the person that pointed out that these were RGB and not "photo" printers just shows his lack of knowledge of printing!!!(and printers)

Also missed was my pointing out that ALL of my reccomendations have to work TOGETHER to get the best print, especially paper.

Someone said the guy needed a dye-sub printer...no dots. If I look at a print from my 980 that was printed on Pictorico White Glossy Film with a 10x loupe, I cannot see a dot pattern either! In fact you can't see a dot pattern on Lumijet Preservation Series Gallery Gloss or Pictorico Gallery Glossy with a 5x loupe, and you CERTAINLY cannot see dots with the naked eye!!! ( provided that you did the paper profiling, printer calibration, and monitor calibration first...but if you did NOT, then no matter what you use, you are just pi* ing in the wind!). Not to mention that the model Olympus 900 gives less than a 8x10 and costs almost a thousand dollars.

Not only does the lowly RGB (with RhinoTek Ink = cheap) give a Cibachrome or Ilfochrome quality print on Pictorico Glossy Film, it is also WATERPROOF!

Totally, completely waterproof. I even soaked a print OVERNIGHT in the sink. It is, at this moment , framed and on the wall. At first I thought it failed because of a small bubble on one spot. Thirty seconds with a hair-dryer fixed that!

These two papers also have a life of 25-50 years if placed under UV non-glare acrylic or glass with RGB (dye-based ink). It was not until this past year that pigmented inks were refined to the point that prints look as good as a correctly printed RGB print. I'm certain that both my 1160 and 980 will be replaced by six-color printers. But at this moment, I'll match my prints and their quality against anyones...no matter what the type!(or brand)

The Konica paper that was mentioned is terrific! Unfortunely, it only looks terrific for about a year before the fade begins. This can be helped with UV glass and framing, but why not spend a dollar or two or more a sheet and get fifty years?

Ilford Inkjet Photo Paper is another very good choice that is cheap, but once again, you have to put it under glass!!!

http://www.pictorico.com is a good place to go for an education about how paper works. > pictorico central...the place to start when you get there.

It also works excellent with archival printers like the 2000P. Also go to http://www.lumijet.com and have a read in the tech, and preservation ink, and preservation paper sections.

The Epson printers that were mentioned are ancient technology, hardly fair to even put them in the mix. Get 2880 dpi and you'll see the difference.

I LOVE Canon cameras and have about $10,000 worth, but the printers and scanners leave much to be desired. Not to say you can't get good results with ANY brand. It depends on who the operator is. But there IS a reason that MOST professionals use an Epson something.... : )

Mr.Obvious said:

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

'''

Well it certainly is obvious to Mr.Obvious that most of you only
read or see the words that you want to see!

I did not reccomend a C80, I said it was the LEAST EXPENSIVE
printer that would get the job done and the C60 was half as fast,
but there WERE BETTER CHOICES!!!

For the person that pointed out that these were RGB and not "photo"
printers just shows his lack of knowledge of printing!!!(and
printers)

Also missed was my pointing out that ALL of my reccomendations have
to work TOGETHER to get the best print, especially paper.

Someone said the guy needed a dye-sub printer...no dots. If I look
at a print from my 980 that was printed on Pictorico White Glossy
Film with a 10x loupe, I cannot see a dot pattern either! In fact
you can't see a dot pattern on Lumijet Preservation Series Gallery
Gloss or Pictorico Gallery Glossy with a 5x loupe, and you
CERTAINLY cannot see dots with the naked eye!!! ( provided that you
did the paper profiling, printer calibration, and monitor
calibration first...but if you did NOT, then no matter what you
use, you are just pi* ing in the wind!). Not to mention that the
model Olympus 900 gives less than a 8x10 and costs almost a
thousand dollars.
Not only does the lowly RGB (with RhinoTek Ink = cheap) give a
Cibachrome or Ilfochrome quality print on Pictorico Glossy Film, it
is also WATERPROOF!
Totally, completely waterproof. I even soaked a print OVERNIGHT in
the sink. It is, at this moment , framed and on the wall. At first
I thought it failed because of a small bubble on one spot. Thirty
seconds with a hair-dryer fixed that!
These two papers also have a life of 25-50 years if placed under UV
non-glare acrylic or glass with RGB (dye-based ink). It was not
until this past year that pigmented inks were refined to the point
that prints look as good as a correctly printed RGB print. I'm
certain that both my 1160 and 980 will be replaced by six-color
printers. But at this moment, I'll match my prints and their
quality against anyones...no matter what the type!(or brand)

The Konica paper that was mentioned is terrific! Unfortunely, it
only looks terrific for about a year before the fade begins. This
can be helped with UV glass and framing, but why not spend a dollar
or two or more a sheet and get fifty years?
Ilford Inkjet Photo Paper is another very good choice that is
cheap, but once again, you have to put it under glass!!!
http://www.pictorico.com is a good place to go for an education about how
paper works. > pictorico central...the place to start when you get
there.
It also works excellent with archival printers like the 2000P. Also
go to http://www.lumijet.com and have a read in the tech, and preservation
ink, and preservation paper sections.

The Epson printers that were mentioned are ancient technology,
hardly fair to even put them in the mix. Get 2880 dpi and you'll
see the difference.

I LOVE Canon cameras and have about $10,000 worth, but the printers
and scanners leave much to be desired. Not to say you can't get
good results with ANY brand. It depends on who the operator is. But
there IS a reason that MOST professionals use an Epson
something.... : )

Click to expand...

You sound like a man who knows what he's talking about when it comes to photo printing. I have an Epson Stylus Photo 700, and an Epson Stylus Photo 1200, both of which are only slightly used. You can have both of them for $250, and I'll pay shipping. I'm tired of ink, and inkjets altogether. Dye-sub is the only way to go for me. I and I WILL compare them with ANY of your inkjets.

& that includes the pros (hehe) -)

Warning: my comments are for regular people printing out photos. I do not consider dunking in water a requirement.

Please be careful of the "specs" you are looking at for long life. Most printer/paper combinations are tested under different accelerated test. Many manufacturers find a test that projects a long life for their prints and uses it for advertising and box specs. Some manufacturers have been sued on this and had to stop the practice.

Dye sub is a dying breed. It used to have an advantage but its almost all gone now. Inkjet is the way to go for printing. I recommend the HP Photosmart printers. If you are a casual photo printer then the Photosmart 100 is great.

If you are really interested in high quality printout then go with a proofing printer like HP Designjet 30 I think. It spec pantone matching.

At the end of the day, just print another copy after a year or 2! My only experience with Epson is my brother threw out his after 4 months and bought an HP.

Scooter said:

Mr.Obvious said:

Harrry a said:

Hi
I recently bought a powershot G2. I am planning to buy a printer
that would give long lasting pictures. I have read really good
things about the Canon S800. Does anybody know about the multi-use
printers that have fax, copier, scanner such as the Canon F50? Does
that compare to the S800 in the quality of prints? I would
appreciate input.

Harry

Click to expand...

'

Well it certainly is obvious to Mr.Obvious that most of you only
read or see the words that you want to see!

I did not reccomend a C80, I said it was the LEAST EXPENSIVE
printer that would get the job done and the C60 was half as fast,
but there WERE BETTER CHOICES!!!

For the person that pointed out that these were RGB and not "photo"
printers just shows his lack of knowledge of printing!!!(and
printers)

Also missed was my pointing out that ALL of my reccomendations have
to work TOGETHER to get the best print, especially paper.

Someone said the guy needed a dye-sub printer...no dots. If I look
at a print from my 980 that was printed on Pictorico White Glossy
Film with a 10x loupe, I cannot see a dot pattern either! In fact
you can't see a dot pattern on Lumijet Preservation Series Gallery
Gloss or Pictorico Gallery Glossy with a 5x loupe, and you
CERTAINLY cannot see dots with the naked eye!!! ( provided that you
did the paper profiling, printer calibration, and monitor
calibration first...but if you did NOT, then no matter what you
use, you are just pi* ing in the wind!). Not to mention that the
model Olympus 900 gives less than a 8x10 and costs almost a
thousand dollars.
Not only does the lowly RGB (with RhinoTek Ink = cheap) give a
Cibachrome or Ilfochrome quality print on Pictorico Glossy Film, it
is also WATERPROOF!
Totally, completely waterproof. I even soaked a print OVERNIGHT in
the sink. It is, at this moment , framed and on the wall. At first
I thought it failed because of a small bubble on one spot. Thirty
seconds with a hair-dryer fixed that!
These two papers also have a life of 25-50 years if placed under UV
non-glare acrylic or glass with RGB (dye-based ink). It was not
until this past year that pigmented inks were refined to the point
that prints look as good as a correctly printed RGB print. I'm
certain that both my 1160 and 980 will be replaced by six-color
printers. But at this moment, I'll match my prints and their
quality against anyones...no matter what the type!(or brand)

The Konica paper that was mentioned is terrific! Unfortunely, it
only looks terrific for about a year before the fade begins. This
can be helped with UV glass and framing, but why not spend a dollar
or two or more a sheet and get fifty years?
Ilford Inkjet Photo Paper is another very good choice that is
cheap, but once again, you have to put it under glass!!!
http://www.pictorico.com is a good place to go for an education about how
paper works. > pictorico central...the place to start when you get
there.
It also works excellent with archival printers like the 2000P. Also
go to http://www.lumijet.com and have a read in the tech, and preservation
ink, and preservation paper sections.

The Epson printers that were mentioned are ancient technology,
hardly fair to even put them in the mix. Get 2880 dpi and you'll
see the difference.

I LOVE Canon cameras and have about $10,000 worth, but the printers
and scanners leave much to be desired. Not to say you can't get
good results with ANY brand. It depends on who the operator is. But
there IS a reason that MOST professionals use an Epson
something.... : )

Click to expand...

You sound like a man who knows what he's talking about when it
comes to photo printing. I have an Epson Stylus Photo 700, and an
Epson Stylus Photo 1200, both of which are only slightly used. You
can have both of them for $250, and I'll pay shipping. I'm tired of
ink, and inkjets altogether. Dye-sub is the only way to go for me.
I and I WILL compare them with ANY of your inkjets.

& that includes the pros (hehe) -)

Click to expand...