Canon PixmaPro 100: I am going to get a new printer, but it will not be just for photo printing. At the suggestion of another Hogger I researched this one. Seems good. But it also says...

will47 Loc: Indianapolis, IN

I am going to get a new printer, but it will not be just for photo printing. At the suggestion of another Hogger I researched this one. Seems good. But it also says it is just a photo printer. In my situation I will need a printer to do general type printing also? I don't do a bunch of general work but some now and again. Your thoughts. Thanks.

Jim Bob

will47 wrote:

I am going to get a new printer, but it will not be just for photo printing. At the suggestion of another Hogger I researched this one. Seems good. But it also says it is just a photo printer. In my situation I will need a printer to do general type printing also? I don't do a bunch of general work but some now and again. Your thoughts. Thanks.

You might want to read some reviews. This printer excels at photo printing and is adequate for general printing. However, I would not purchase or regularly use it for that latter purpose.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

I had one, sold it. Good printer. Seems like it uses a lot of ink.

Jim Bob

[quote=Fotoartist]I had one, sold it. Good printer. Seems like it uses a lot of ink.[/quote

Ink is where the real profit lies.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

I think that is why they were almost giving them away. Like a pusher, they hook you with an ink habit.[quote=Jim Bob][quote=Fotoartist]I had one, sold it. Good printer. Seems like it uses a lot of ink.[/quote

Ink is where the real profit lies.[/quote]

Machinedoc Loc: Yorktown Heights, NY

I've had a Pixma Pro 100 for almost 3 years - it excels at producing high quality photographic prints. Yes, the ink is "expensive" so I wouldn't ever consider using it for "general printing." (It would be helpful to know what you mean by "general" printing.) An inexpensive ink jet or laser would work for "general" printing, but not the pro 100.

will47 Loc: Indianapolis, IN

Machinedoc wrote:

I've had a Pixma Pro 100 for almost 3 years - it excels at producing high quality photographic prints. Yes, the ink is "expensive" so I wouldn't ever consider using it for "general printing." (It would be helpful to know what you mean by "general" printing.) An inexpensive ink jet or laser would work for "general" printing, but not the pro 100.

Is it hard to set up and get going? By general printing I used my other one for mostly printing receipts for bills I paid on line.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

If you don't need to print larger than 8.5 / 11, the Canon TS 9020 is an excellent printer for photos and general purpose printing and the ink is not astronomically pricey.

Machinedoc Loc: Yorktown Heights, NY

The Pro 100 is easy to set up. Please note that is has a large footprint and weighs more than a few pounds. Canon, and its dealers have deals where there might be a rebate and photopaper thrown in. If you're not in a hurry, shop around. As far as printing other things, if you have the room and the cash, pick up an inexpensive inkjet at Staples, Walmart, etc - much more economical than the Pro 100. Using the 100 to print things other than photos is kind of like using an Abrams tank to mow the lawn...you can do it, but...

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Yes, if you use the Pro 100 for gen. Usage you will go through a lot of ink. I have an HP laser jet that will do up to 5000 sheets on a Toner cartridge if you do a lot of BW. Save the Pro 100 for that special print after the check out print at Walgreens for 5.00 dollars.

BebuLamar

For general printing I have 2 laser printers for the job. A B&W one for printing black text which I use the most. A color one for printing something that needs color but need not be accurate. For example charts, graphs, a brochure etc..
I think the Pro100 would be a good printer for photo only the problem is if I use it only for photo I would be using it very infrequently which would cause the head clog. So really I have been thinking about a photo printer but I don't have one.

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

I have a cheap HP LaserJet (B&W), a cheap HP All-In-One InkJet and a Canon Pixma Pro 100. The last one purchased was the Pro 100 and as little printing as I do that would be the one I would have if I was only going to have one printer. [The printers were bought as needed and have not died so except for the Pro 100 they get very little use.]

One thing to realize is that a 4"x4" print of an image would use more ink than a full page of text on 8.5x11. That is why photo printers "seem" to use a lot of ink (and they do use a lot of ink for images). But if you want good image prints it might make sense to get the Pro 100 and use it for the occasional text job. It does have a large footprint and weighs about 45 pounds. The Pro 100 (or the Epson equivalent) is the cheapest way at home to get image prints that are nice enough to display.

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

For the price of the Canon Pixma Pro 100 you can pick up a Brother monochrome laser for everyday text printing for $99.00 and in the long run save yourself a lot of money on ink. If you do a lot of text it will pay for itself in a year or less.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1080910-REG/brother_hl_l2340dw_compact_monochrome_laser.html

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

I tried printing documents on my Pro-100, beautiful and slooooooooooooooooooow, printed at the same speed it does 8 1/2 x 11 photos. I am using an old HP-940 for general printing.
Also the Pro-100 is large and heavy. An outstanding photo printer, but large, heavy and Canon ink is expensive. I refill with Precision Color. I also refill the 940.

BebuLamar

MichaelH wrote:

I have a cheap HP LaserJet (B&W), a cheap HP A... (show quote)

Even a very good inkjet like the Pro100 can't print black text as clean as a cheap laser printer.