ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Seems the print head on my old Canon i965 has given up (half the Magenta isn't working) despite my vain efforts to clean/purge it. A new head is £65, ouch. So new printer time. So here we go again finding something that prints photo quality, but doesn't cost a fortune to buy and run (HP/Lexmark) or gives up the ghost prematurely (Epson/Canon).

So I happened to be aimlessly browsing in P(iss)C world whilst the women was trying to find thermals in Decathlon and noted Kodak all-in-one claiming to be 50% cheaper to run, also a nice RRP price to buy too. This intrigued me - whats the catch?


Well, some digging on the net reveals this:

http://www.qualitylogic.com/tuneup/u...tober-2008.pdf

Either way, seems the Kodak printers are a shed load cheaper to run and buy. But are they reliable, and what is the print quality like? When I want photo I want top notch, colour accuracy, definition and not be able to tell it was produced on a inkjet.

(PS I'd advise anyone to look at the above link on running costs before buying another inkjet printer, It might save you a few bob in the long run )

Iain Young

My Canon i865 hasn't given up yet and I've been using it for years. Wouldn't hesitate to buy another Canon if/when this one goes phut. It's lasted much better than any other make I've used in the past (Epson, HP).

Not tried a Kodak, but I know they used to be a bit dodgy. Perhaps they've improved...

p.s. if you don't mind waiting a couple of days, why not use an online service like Online Digital Photo Printing & Developing - Order Photo Prints Online from 5p - Photobox? I've ordered loads of stuff through them and it's much cheaper than using an inkjet to print your photos...

pimmo2000

iTrader: (6)

I bought a HP colour laser about 5 years ago .. used it all through uni and to print all the pictures from every holiday and event since and its still on the original ink !

Well worth it !

I paid £160 for printer and £150 for ink.

jaytc2003

iTrader: (1)

My trusty epson r200 has been reliable for many a year now and with ink cartridges less than £2 each its relatively cheap to run as well. Must admit though the print quality is now detiorating a bit but not enough for me to change it yet.

Agree with running costs on lexmark, used to have one and it was crap printing quality but the ink costs were silly as well, use a hp colour at work and although print quality on that is okay, again the ink costs are prohibitive

mart360

To be honest, inkjets that use a tricolour cartridge are a rip off, as is any stuff HP that uses liquid ink. they date stamp cartridges, so once the expiry date has gone, regardless of whether you've used the ink, the printer wont work.

£64 in cartridges used once!!!

never again..

However there bw lazer, is great, as it uses powder :thumb;

the other printer i used is a Phazer 850 superb colour prints.

Ink sticks cost a small fortune, but blacks are /were free for life

that said i got a clearance lot from work, 4 years ago, and still going strong.

Downside the printer has to be on at all times

mart

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

From looking at some reviews, the Kodak is a low-end market inkjet, so I'm now thinking its not going to cut it for image quality.

I'm thinking I need another 6 colour inkjet, which brings me back to Canon; which poses a problem, as Canon no longer sell a high-end 6/7 colour inkjet. The only high-end ones are now multi-functions or A3 printers, fine. But I'm paying extra for features I'm not going to use.

I would buy a proper photo printer, but very few seem to do 5"x7" prints (plus A4 photo paper is handy as you can fit two 5x7" boarder-less pics on so it works out cheaper on paper - just add guillotine ).

Low-end lasers don't give the correct colours for photos imo; I run three (two Epsons, one HP) at work and even on compatible glossy laser paper (tricky to find) its not right, resolution was notably lower than the i965 too. Much cheaper to run for normal stuff though (According to my spreadsheet, the Epson lasers are running at 0.9p B&W and about 6p colour per page, and thats including replacement photo-conductors at £115 a pop).

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Scrub it, I found a MP970 for £130, so I'm getting one of them (RRP £270, why do they use such unrealistic RRPs?? )

HankScorpio

I gave up printing photos years ago, I send them off and can get lab quality for pennies (sometimes one penny), printer gets used for the odd letter and that's about it.

£130 quid buys a lot of prints and that doesn't include ink, paper, wastage and most importantly, my time

Asda are doing small Canons for 25 quid that meet day to day needs, get the photos done by a photo lab.

bob269

Bear in mind that test result uses genuine inks, the 3rd party stuff is just as good at a fraction of the price.

Epson genuines can be £10-£15 where 3rd party inks are only a few quid.

pwhittle

depends on your needs though. I've never had good skin tones with 3rdparty inke in Epson printers (HP can't do them even with their own inks). As a wedding / portrait photographer that's not great! Also they don't do b&w well (again most inkjets can't but some Epsons are ok), and they fade / develop a hue quicky.
pro labs all the way for quality (not high street or Photobox type ones though)

lightning101

Try putting prints from "compatible" inks on the wall for a year and watch them fade by 50%

Get pigment based compatibles from hong kong

scoobyverysoon

iTrader: (1)

Ive got and had a epson 830U for well over a year its been great use black diamond carts in it they only cost £2 each

My printed out Photos havent degraded as far as I can see

if I need to print 100 pictures or so then it gets sent off to ASDA for the sake of a few pence per print its a damn good deal

Dr.No

My i965 used to do this, and my i9950 does it as well - when the head gets well clogged up with ink you can't do a thing to get some colours working again.... BUT....

...the heads are surprisingly durable.... and soaking them (literally) completely in hot water overnight, and then letting them dry out completely before reinserting into the printer often works a treat.

I've got a fangled syringe and bit of silicone tubing, that fits perfectly over the ink ports (where the cartridges feed into) and if you remove the filters/etc from the ports you can blast water and/or air through the head and out of the nozzels. I've pumped hot water through my i9950 head on a few occasions to properly clean it out - and as long as it's left to dry out properly it works a treat when it goes back in the machine.

Give it a go - you've nothing to lose....

DN

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Thanks, but I've done all of that (was advised in another thread).

The black leaks into the yellow contaminating it, and half the Magenta isn't working (which also makes it impossible to realign the heads). Soaked and sloshed the head about in hot de-ionised water until no more ink was present to stain the water (had to change it 5 times), then left it overnight, and finished off with isopropyl.

Whilst this fixed the yellow contamination. Half the magenta still does not work (and its the complete lower half too - which points to an electrical fault on the printer or in the head IMO).

Since then the yellow has become contaminated again. Not sure what is causing that, either internal problem on the head or its somehow sucking up ink from the waste tank/pads when the head is parked.

On that note, new printer is due today. So I have four new and unopened genuine Canon BCi-6 ink tanks spare (one black, one magenta, two cyan), plus whatever is left in the printer; which has a full yellow and full photo cyan, rest are about half-quarter except the cyan which is almost empty.

I'll probably stick the lot on ebay next week as spares/repair, I should get at least £20 back for the new cartridges alone.

StickyMicky

i still have 4 of them dell printers that the "scoobynet massive" bought a few years back (probably about 4 years back lol)

all still unopened and in storage up above the office LOL

kept them as "spares" just in case