I and many of my neighbors have purchased Epson Eco-tank printers, most in the $250-$350 range that have provided excellent service. When the Epson models in that price range became hard to find, some bought the Brother version which was also very good.
Several of us got the Epson ET-3750 which has a doc feeder, a very good scanner with great software, two-sided printing and phenomenal ink usage. A friend just printed FIVE loose-leaf binders full of color quilt patterns, both sides of all sheets, and reports that the ink containers are still "full". I have used mine since June and have the same results after LOTS of printing. I have recommended the Epson (or Brother) to many of my neighbors and every one has been happy with their choice. Watch for sales at Sam's, Costco and Staples.
Enough said!!

I and many of my neighbors have purchased Epson Eco-tank printers, most in the $250-$350 range that have provided excellent service. When the Epson models in that price range became hard to find, some bought the Brother version which was also very good.
Several of us got the Epson ET-3750 which has a doc feeder, a very good scanner with great software, two-sided printing and phenomenal ink usage. A friend just printed FIVE loose-leaf binders full of color quilt patterns, both sides of all sheets, and reports that the ink containers are still "full". I have used mine since June and have the same results after LOTS of printing. I have recommended the Epson (or Brother) to many of my neighbors and every one has been happy with their choice. Watch for sales at Sam's, Costco and Staples.
Enough said!!

I don't do a lot of printing so I'm not a good source of advice, but from comments on forums the main problems with ink jet printers are (1) the cost of ink and (2) clogging of the heads.

The color printer I have (Xerox ColorQube) uses colored wax instead of liquid ink. It's easy to handle and when you don't use it the ink doesn't dry out. There is a warmup period if you go to print something in order to liquefy the ink. I wouldn't call it a photo printer but it does well enough for my purposes and I consider that it runs cheaper than ink jets (but I do not have an ink jet for comparison).

But since drying ink is probably the main cause of print clogging, I would think that in order to keep your printer running well you have to print regularly. Probably at least several times per week. That will reduce the time between uses which I would think is one of the main causes of clogging.

This is probably true whether you use cartridges or tanks.

But as I said, I don't use an ink jet printer so what do I know? Just putting in my 0.02 cents.

Since I don't print regularly, I find it easier to send out important images for printing than trying to do it myself.

For once timing is great. After considerable research and temptation to throw a rock at my Xerox WorkCentre 6027 printer, I am about to pull the trigger on an Epson WorkForce ST-4000 general purpose all-in-one printer--most likely on Monday. I considered specifically the Epson 2760 but the WorkForce ST-4000 is, I am told, a much more robust machine. The ST-4000 carries a list price of $499 but I believe B&H has it for $399 AND when I call on Monday I will ask about them paying Utah sales tax if I use my PayBoo card. In addition to the frustrations of using the Xerox (it took two new ones and finally a refurbished one to get a printer that worked) I got tired of paying for cartridges. Let us know what you finally decide and later, how it works out for you. If you need further info from my research, please do not hesitate to PM me. Best of luck for you. I am hoping for the same kind of good luck with my purchase on Monday.

I looked up both those printers online...

Sorry, but I wouldn't use either of them for photos.

I'm sure they're fine for documents and even multi-colored graphics.

But photos require a minimum of six colors: cyan, magenta, yellow, light cyan, light magenta and black... I used a printer with that setup for "proofs" and thumbnail catalogs for quite while. It was up to making prints with enough quality to frame and hang, but could handle the less demanding work. On some papers the inks it used were very prone to fading, too, I eventually discovered.

Actually, most of the better photo quality printers now use eight to ten colors (some of which might be grays to make improved B&W prints and/or a clear "gloss optimizer" to even out the finish on images, not actual colors).

If you read the one, two and three star reviews of these 4-color, large tank "eco" printers on B&H, Adorama, Amazon etc. you will see some buyers complain about poor photo quality. So don't expect very much.

The Canon gets panned for not having a backlit display and appears to have a lot fewer but overall better reviews on B&H than the Epson. It's interesting that they use a pigment based black ink... I presume that's so important documents won't fade too quickly. I wonder how the colors hold up. There also were some complaints about difficulty setting up the printer and, surprisingly, poor customer support. Canon usually gets high marks for their customer support with cameras and such... maybe it's different with their printers. One review made is sound as if they might have out-sourced customer support (because the person kept trying to sell them non-Canon products).

The Epson appears to have trouble connecting wirelessly... a lot of complaints about that. I also saw some mention of Epson's "limiter" and don't know if that pertains to this printer or not. It was the case with one I had in the past, though. This is a page counter that Epson has pre-programmed so that after a certain number of pages the printer shuts down and you get a message "printer worn out, replace printer". With my printer, turned out someone online had hacked Epson's code and was providing an app that reset the printer and allowed it to work again. I did that successfully three times with my Epson printer. In other words, it lived almost four times as long as Epson had decided it should. It started having paper feed problems, so I finally replaced it... but it was my decision to do so. Not Epson's "limiter" telling me when the printer needs replacement. This scheme of Epson's is taking planned obsolescence to the nth degree and why I am less a fan of Epson printers than I was in the past! I hadn't heard if they were still doing it or not, but some of the feedback about that I saw reminded me why I don't have an Epson any longer.

"All-in-one" printers like these are both a positive and a negative. On the one hand, they pack multiple functions into one device, taking up a lot less desk space than separate ones would. It also makes some sense to combine these particular functions. On the other hand, if you have no use for some of the functions it may be a waste. And, there are more functions to potentially fail, forcing you to replace the whole rig if one function quits and it's something you use a lot.

I'm sure both would be fine "hard wired" to a computer via USB. And they are probably fine for documents and graphics.... not to mention a lot more cost effective than most inkjets. But I would never use one for photos.

When I was printing a lot of business documents I had a laser printer for that purpose (black only... color ones were too expensive back then). I used that for many years, printed thousands of pages with it and only had to replace the toner cartridge a few times. It was pricey to buy, but worked out a lot cheaper and more efficient than any inkjet.

I used that alongside the 8.5" 6-color Epson inkjet mentioned above, for proofs and thumbnails. For finished photos worth framing I used a 13" 6-color Epson, then replaced it with an HP with 8-color pigment inks. I still use the HP, but it's an older model and getting tough to find inks (I may try refilling). I still prefer those pigment inks on matte papers, which are what I frame under glass. I now also use a 13" Canon 8-color, dye-based printer for photos on gloss and semi-gloss papers, occasionally frame B&W prints on semi-gloss or luster paper, but mostly for stuff that won't be framed (proofs, catalogs, marketing materials, etc.)