Recommend me a printer (or two)

[johannielscom]

Hi,

setting myself up to work as an independent photographer. I find I'm in need of a printer that can handle a single sheet of paper better than the current flimsy Canon MX410 which for no apparent reason rips most sheets in sideways and chews them up 😀


Here's what I require:

• Troublefree functionality, both mechanically and in software!
• I'm thinking laser printing is less of a hassle than inkjet, correct?
• Can handle business correspondence in smaller volumes
• Can print photos in pretty awesome quality (both film and Ricoh GXR for B&W and Nikon D600 for color)
• Wifi capability would be nice but is not needed

I will be using Apple gear with it, Lightroom and Darktable for photo software. Printing photos will be for the quicker and less critical stuff only, if it's going to be final product, it'll be printed digitally by a photography lab close-by.

Anyone that can recommend me a single printer that does all this? Or maybe a two-printer combo that gets your job done?

Much obliged!

 

[mfunnell]

Firstly, I don't think you'll find that affordable laser printers are able to produce photo-quality output, although they are very good for most other tasks. Or, at least, that was the state of things a few years ago when I last looked, and I haven't heard anything that would change my assessment.

Secondly, I can't really recommend a current cheapish printer, but will note I've had very good service from the two older printers I have. I'm using a Canon iP4500 printer (dye based inks; letter/A4 size) and a Canon Pro9500 (the first model: pigment inks, 19x13/A3+ size).

I've not changed my iP4500 printer because (a) it works just fine; and (b) later models use chipped ink cartridges designed to stop people in, say, Australia buying inks at US prices. Mine uses older cartridges without such "region encoding". If you are in the US and don't need to worry about this, I'd guess that any of the higher-end Canon or Epson letter-size dye-based printers would do a fine job for printing photos and small runs of business documents. By "higher-end" I mean purpose-built photo printers, not multi-function devices. If you're producing lots of business documents it might be worth your while getting both a photo printer and a laser printer.

...Mike

 

[johannielscom]

BUMP.

128 readers, one reply (thanks Mike).


Nobody uses a printer for more than one purpose?

 

[Godfrey]

BUMP.
128 readers, one reply (thanks Mike).
Nobody uses a printer for more than one purpose?

I have three printers in my office:

- An ancient Epson R2400 that does all my photo printing. It's well past it's due-by date, having been in service since October 2005 and produced somewhere in the neighborhood of 7000 prints ranging from exhibition quality, to client purchases, to my 'hand made card' fine art stuff, to xday cards, etc etc. A great printer, I just wish it would expire and give me justification to buy a 3880 now. ;-)

- An even more ancient HP 7960. I usually have it fitted with the double-size black ink cartridge. It does all my day to day envelopes, "print out a PDF book", etc etc etc. I've also made some very nice snapshot size B&Ws and color prints with it, on HP's expensive photo papers ... but that's not its primary reason for still being in service. It just works, and keeps on working, and I won't toss it until it croaks. .

- A two year old HP E710n wireless combo scanner/fax/printer. I bought it because it supports Air Print (so I can print from the iPad/iPhone direct to it), it is a decent document scanner with automated multipage capability, will print two sided, and works with VueScan as well, wirelessly. When the HP7960 finally croaks, this will take over its purpose as well. (I've never used the fax capability ...)

For photo printing, I stick with Epsons that take the K3 ink set. The R2400, R2880, R3800, etc are all superb performers with great inks and there are profiles for every paper, supplied by the paper vendors, that work very well. I wouldn't use one of them for day to day office printing needs.

For office stuff, well, the latest generation of combo scanner/printer/etc multifunction units are best: much more economical on ink and more useful overall. Having something that is wireless and interacts seamlessly with OS X and iOS devices is a basic requirement for my use.

good luck!
G

 

[swoop]

I use two printers. One for high quality photos and another for work/home documents and simple 4x6 photos.

For photos I use a Canon Pro 9000 Mark II. I purchased it for around $200 about two months before their latest generation was announced and it works really well. The dye based inks don't bother me and a set of ink tanks lasts awhile and is only $14 each.

For documents and 4x6 family photos I use a brother mfc-j635w. I bought on sale at best buy for a little over $100 and it offered all of my requirements. Double sided printing for long contracts. Wireless functionality for print from anywhere in my house. It's also internet connected so I can scan documents directly to my dropbox or evernote account as a JPG or PDF which is a big help as I can just scan it and it's automatically on my phone & laptop.

The Canon Pro 9000mk2 has worked flawlessly. The Brother j635w has given me a few paper jams which is extra annoying because the printer needs to be unplugged to be reset once it jams. But it only happens once every few months. Ink is pretty affordable especially if you purchase the large capacity tanks which provide 100% more ink for 50% more money.

 

[Gerry M]

Printing photo's, I've used an Epson R2400 for a number of years. Mostly b&w with QTR and do a little color printing now and then. For documents, I use an Epson XP 600.

 

[johannielscom]

Good suggestions, and older stuff too which is cheaper to get! Me like! 😀

Thanks folks, much obliged! Still hoping for a single printer that can do it all, I'll be working from home and have no office, just a corner in the living room until my oldest moves out in a year (or two)!

 

[Addy101]

I have the Epson R2000, great printer. Would go for the R3000 if I was an "independent photographer". But I don't understand, if you want just a printer for proofs, get a cheaper printer, but don't expect awesome quality - but the awesome quality you get from the digital printer, not? Why would your printer need to be awesome?

The equivalent Canon printers are just as good btw.

 

[johannielscom]

'Pretty awesome' as in 'near awesome', Addy. Meaning 'it's sufficient if it approaches top quality, it doesn't have to be the best of the best'.

That will indeed do, since the end product will be printed by a professional photography and printing lab.

The R2000, I'll look into it, thanks!

 

[Bob Michaels]

I find the actual purchase price of a printer to be much less important economically than what the ink costs. Remember that consumer ink jets still use the old Gillette razor blade business model where they practically give you the handle so you will buy the blades.

I have seen a lot of digital prints. None better than my Epson 2400. Some just as good for printers that cost less. I sense that they are getting like cameras where it is almost all the user and little the hardware being used.

 

[icebear]

Johan, what ever printer you finally decide on, get this book :
Jeff Scheve "The Digital Print", easily worth the money because you will max out the quality of your images. Not an easy read, pretty detailed but essential, if you are after excellent quality prints. Also contains basic info on printers (he favors Epson and Canon for fine art). More info on Luminous Landscape.

 

[mfunnell]

Johan, what ever printer you finally decide on, get this book :
Jeff Scheve "The Digital Print", easily worth the money because you will max out the quality of your images. Not an easy read, pretty detailed but essential, if you are after excellent quality prints. Also contains basic info on printers (he favors Epson and Canon for fine art). More info on Luminous Landscape.

While I can't yet fully endorse this book (because I've just started reading it) I can say that it looks very good in outline and the part of it I've read so far lives up to it's billing.

...Mike

 

[gavinlg]

I actually use a cheapie canon ip4850 and for a4 and under prints can't tell the difference in print quality between it and my old Epson r1900 med format printer. I prefer the canon tbh.

 

[johannielscom]

At least looking into the book now, and have decided that I'm going to strip-down my Canon to see if I can remedy the defect it has developed. After all, if I turn it into a basket case I'm not far from where I am now with it 🙄

If I get it to work again, I'll maybe look into a second printer for photographs.

Thanks for all your suggestions, I've bookmarked the thread for future reference!

 

[Black]

I might have a Canon imagePROGRAF iPF6300 that I can let go for £1800 if you like, Johan? 😉

 

[johannielscom]

Chris,

I think you accidentally added one zero too many in your post and yes please I'll take it for GBP 180 😛

 

[Black]

😀





10 character rule, obliged.

 

[lynnb]

My experience has been that it's cheaper to use a laser printer for text and simple colour documents (currently a Brother HL-3045CN colour laser) and a photo-quality inkjet for photos (Epson or Canon). I used to use a Canon dye-inkjet for both; I got very nice results but the running costs were high (it was a small-cartridge model).

I enjoy printing my own photos rather than sending to a lab, so I went with a 3880 photo printer based on its reliability reputation, dealer support, cheaper running costs (large ink cartridges), and print quality.

I've felt no need to use the laser printer for photographic prints. Buying the colour laser printer was cheaper than buying one replacement toner cartridge for my old bw laser - also a Brother. Laser printers are now throwaway items - go figure!

If you're a low-volume printer then a dye-based Canon would be what I would consider.

 

[ola.b]

I am not sure you can get one printer to handle both "awesome photographic prints" along with "standard business correspondance". Maybe a decent photoprinter and then a cheapie for the letters?

All I can tell you that the money spent on my Epson r3000 has been the most satisfying money spent on photography-stuff. (x100 being a very close second).
Almost every picture I bother with post-processing to a degree, I print. Usually the small postcard sized ones, some in A4 that get some hang-time on the wall.
And it´s much more fun to send/show people prints.

I just ordered some A3+ paper.. Can´t wait to see how things look BIG!