G/F wants a photoprinter to print off pics from her digital camera. She likes the idea of a photoprinter. Are these just glorified inkjet printers? Why not just buy a proper inject printer and print pics off that onto nice paper? Or is there some great benefit of photoprinters I don't know about?

Looking at £50 or so mark.

 

Photo printers normally have 6 to 8 inks to make up for the grain left by missing tones and shades unable to be captured by 4 inks

Epson R200 for 49.99 should do the trick and its only 76p for a copy cartridge.

 

I think the idea of a phtoprinter is borderless prints, 5x7" or 6x4" paper capability and has a built in card readers and a little LCD screen to view pic, so no need for a PC to print pics. Which is a little more than just the ink L101

I have a Cannon "conventional" PC based inkjet printer that has 8 seperate colour ink tanks. It support borderless prints, on 6x4 and 7x5" paper as well as A4 (and CDs). Plus it does support "PicBridge" so it doesn't have to use the PC to print. But it won't support the borderless print function on A4 via the PicBridge (needs the PC for that), doesn't have flash card readers and no LCD viewing screen. So it is capable of printing photo quality prints, but isn't typically a photo printer

The latter type such as my cannon is usually cheaper than the equivelent dedicated photo printer

But at £50, the Cannon is way out of the budget. So, Epson or Hp (Epsom better value on ink, Hps usually are better screwed together, although not so good as of late ).

 

Ali - well derrrrrrr - I have the canon ip8500 at home, I also have a 4 colour non photo printer that can do borderless prints.

 

Usually the non-photo Hp's don't do borderless. But not quite sure on spec as of late. It's not a strict nessesity, but it is somthing to look out for on printers not branded as "photo printers"