Printer choice

[ffutures]

After a lot of reflection I've decided to go with the Canon duplexing mono printer; at an effective price of £50 after cashback it works out at about 2.5p per page with the starter cartridge, 2p a page with high capacity cartridges. The last colour laser I looked at was very tempting, but in the end I think I have to accept that colour isn't something I need very often; I may buy myself a cheap inkjet for occasional colour work, I haven't decided yet.

The bottom line, I think, is that if this turns out to be a bad move I'm only out £50 (and possibly the price of an inkjet later), and have numerous family members who could make use of e.g. the mono laser if I do eventually decide I need colour for my main printer.

Later - looking at cheap inkjets, Staples are doing the HP deskjet 1000 for about £20 inc. VAT. Anyone know anything about them?

Comments

[crazyscot.livejournal.com]

The DeskJet 1050 (print/scan/copy, presumably the same mechanism) is entirely plausible, though as ever the first hit is free and they sting you for the cartridges.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

About what I thought - from my perspective e.g. infrequent use the HP may be a better bet than Epson because it's easier to clean cartridge nozzles etc., also HP cartridges and refills are available everywhere.

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

HP's cartridge pricing/supply tactics are mercenary, but Epson's but are just plain *EVIL*.

Give me mercenary every time: At least I can guesstimate what they're likely to do, how soon, by how much, with whom, and why. =:o\

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

Just so happens you're into my specialist territory here.. =:o}

The current range of HP low-end inkjets all take the same cartridge type the 301.
The *previous* year's range also all take the same cartridge type: the 300.
It now being July, it's possible that we're only 2 months away form the arrival another new cartidge type for the low end HPs. I *hope* not, but it's possible (I'd say 50/50). Either way, there will be a new range of printers (from all the manufacturers, not just HP) hitting the market between now and October.

Good things about the generation of HP's 2009 range of printers, i.e. the generation *before* the Deskjet 1000/1050, versus the current generation:

1. We've sold hundeds of them since I joined PC world 19 months ago, and only had a handful returned or grumbled about.

2. Of the various HP inkjet cartridge types, the 300 is used by a wide range of printers that were *all* selling well last year. This bodes well for keeping the price of those cartridges down over a reasonable length of time to come. (The unlucky folks are those who buy a machine that uses a cratridge that then never gets used in any other printer: Within 2 years they're one of only a dozen or so people in the country still buying teh cartridges and the price shoots up.)

3. They were physically quite solid - Although this was partly thanks to the front-loading paper system, which some people don't like / have problems with.

The newer range of printers (released around Sept/Oct last year) that take the 301 type cartridge, including the Deskjet 1000 and 1050, don't seem to have sold in as great a number (not anything specific to them, just printers sales and hardware sales in general are down this year), so the 301 cartridges may not stay as cheap for as long. Offset against that is that you're already a year further into the sales curve for the 300s than the 301s, and the number of printers that take the 300 being sold *now* has dropped to a trickle (basically, just the higher end printers that haven't yet been replaced by newer models, and whatever stocks are left around of the lower end ones).

Also, the newer models use top-loading, which is fine if you have the space free above where you keep the printer, and don't mind having to reach further over to put the paper in. Personally, I use my (3 year old) front-loading HP as a monitor stand, only rarely lifting it off when I need to scan something. You can't do that with a top-loader. =:o}

So, if I were looking for a printer, and I spotted a brand new 2009 model HP being sold for the same sort of price as as the 2010 models, I'd be strongly tempted to grab the older model just on the odds of the inks staying cheaper for longer. The fact that I also prefer front-loading would be a bonus. =:o}

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

So which model would you recommend?

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

Any you can find at a reasonable price that takes the 300 cartridge, and does everything you need. =:o}

Internally, the machines that take a given cartridge type(*) are all basically the same printer so should give exactly the same quality; it's just the additional features list that changes - i.e. does it have wireless; can it take other types of memory cards besides SD; is the preview/feedback screen tiny or a bit bigger; can it edit pictures that are fed to it on an SD card before printing them; does it have the fancy big control panel that looks a bit like, and has most of the power of, a small tablet PC... If you're just using it as a printer-scanner as a peripheral to a PC, then apart from wireless none of those things matter. If you're a photographer who'd like to print his work directly from an SD card without touching the PC, then the extra features on the higher models may be useful.

*(At the low-end that is. The more business-oriented and/or serious photography printers get more actual design variation, but that's why they cost anything from 5 to 20 times as much! Basically, the low-end is machines that use the two-cartridge system (one black, one colour). The high end is where you're using 4 or or more cartridges, which from what you've said would be overkill for your purposes. The printer and scanner mechanisms are mass produced to fit into a standard shaped housing, and then slight variations on that housing are moulded to accomodate the different feature sets that need to be bolted on for different models / price-points.)

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

Slight caveat: Maximum DPI. That's one thing that *does* change within a range of printers that affects the *maximum* quality achievable. That said, even on my old model, I find the improvement given by going up from 300 to 600DPI isn't worth the slow down and the extra ink used. I can't tell the difference between 1200 and 2400DPI except on the highest quality photographs. But if your eyes are sharper than mine or you work a lot with fine print, you may disagree.

DPI is quoted as X x Y, indicating width-wise versus length-wise. The lower figure of the two is the one that will have the more obvious effect, so you can ignore the bigger one when comparing printers.

Gosh, this has been a useful refresher course for me! It's months since I was last left in charge of the printer section instead of the till... =;o}

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

Yes, but since I don't actually have HP's catalogue memorized, can you suggest any that are a simple small printer-only model?

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

Sorry, just saw your message below - I'm after a small one because it would get in the way less, with a second printer around. Also, the flatter paper path of e.g. the Deskjet 1000 could be handy.

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

A stray thought: One exception to the "all the same, same quality" rules is the difference between printers with scanners and those without. The ones with scanners will tend to give slightly better quality simply because they're *heavier*, so there mechanism iasn't so subject to random vibrations. Also, it's less like to gradually walk across your table and fall on the floor!

Almost all the printers bought these days have scanners in them, simply 'cos the price difference is marginal. The "printer only" versions tend to be bought more for kids bedrooms or cramped student accomodation. =:o}