Gryffon Loc: Coddenham, Suffolk, England

I need to buy a new printer. Can anyone advice me of the best of the cheaper range of printers (up to about £150) which give good results for printing photos. I am an amateur and occasionally enter these for my local camera club competitions, but do not need A3 size.

Or would I be better off going to my local photo shop to print images?

Thanks for any help.

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Just about any Canon or Epson printer that is advertised as a "photo printer" will deliver very nice images; the biggest problem with inexpensive printers is though, they use just as much ink as the more expensive printers do, so operating any photo printer isn't exactly "cheap"; of course, I suppose that all depends on how many prints you make, and how big they are.

As for having your images printed by someone else........I doubt if anyone can offer more than a personal opinion about that subject! I know many photographers who wouldn't DREAM of having one of their images printed, but then again, I probably know just as many who wouldn't dream of "bothering" to going to the expense of owning a printer, buying the ink and paper, then doing all of that work, printing the pictures! So, who's to say, "who's right, and who's wrong"? In my view, no one is "right" or "wrong".......it's all a matter of opinion, and as we all know, opinions vary, (sometime considerably.)

Having said all that........I'm personally among the group who prefers to do my own printing; (and just about everything else). I still change my own oil, install my own water pumps when they need replacing, I still mow my own grass, (and I have quite a lot of it), I love to matt my on pictures, and I even produce my own molding to make my own frames; I even saw my own logs into lumber, then build chairs, book cases, and curio cabinets with the lumber. I never have gotten around to building my own lumber drying kiln yet, so I mostly air-dry my lumber, or occasionally I'll pay to have it kiln-dried for me.

I just like "doing things" for myself.

norvik1943 Loc: Jenks, OK and Domazan, France

Hi Gryffon,
Each has their brand preference, but I've been very satisfied with my Epson SX/415 All-In-One here in France. Using Epson paper and inks,the quality of photos is fantastic plus I can copy documents, scan existing photos and negatives with ease. My 415 model is now outdated but later models will produce similar results for what you want up to at least A4 size.

The photo shows a few of the ones I've printed. I apologize for quality of photo, getting some glare from windows behind me.
A second photo, bit of glare from glass and vignetting from my Nikon P90.

I added a scan of old glass negative that I was able to save using backlight technology from Epson's software drivers. Normally a much more expensive scanner with frame holders would have been necessary. I was and still am amazed at the quality of the scan.

Hope this helps. I paid about Euro 70 for the printer, newer models are comparable prices. Cost Euro 40 for the multi pack of the four ink colors.

Selection printed with Epson SX-415 Printer


Flower selection printed with Epson SX-415


Glass negative scanned using backlight technology from Epson drivers


Original photo of the framed flowers

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

Try:

http://www.parkcameras.com/25155/Epson-Expression-Premium-XP-605.html

At £149.00p and reduced it falls within your budget.
Of course it is only A4. You will be hard pressed to obtain an A3 printer for your budget.

Gryffon Loc: Coddenham, Suffolk, England

Thanks for such comprehensive replies. Yes Gitzo UH my photo club advised me to do my own printing so as to retain control and that sounds like good advice.
norvik1943 I was interested to hear that the Epson SX 415 would scan old glass negatives, as I have several myself and also lots of 35mm b&w negatives.
I will investigate the specs for the XP-605 mentioned by Leicaflex i am happy with A4 prints and if this also has software to scan negatives this would be a bonus.

Again all of you thanks for taking the trouble to give me really useful replies, best wishes, Gryffon.

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Norvik.......Very nice, indeed! Thanks so much for sharing; After all is said and done, it's my opinion that having your own printer, you'll end up going to the trouble to print and then enjoy a lot more of your photos, than if you have to go thru all the rigamarole of having them printed by someone else, (not to mention the expense of doing it)

Actually, the companies that make ink jet printers sell some of the lower priced photo printers at a loss, then, (hopefully) realize a profit from the sale of ink and paper; BTW......yes, the paper that the manufacturer of your printer sells IS more expensive, but it make ALL the difference! (the same thing holds true for using the ink made by your printer's manufacturer; (costs more, makes MUCH nicer prints, and is far more "permanent".)

I'm not at all familiar with purchasing things in the U.K., but in the U.S., if you have either a Canon or an Epson printer, just about any store you go in will have the necessary ink and paper for their printers; for many of the others, you may have to order it and wait for delivery.

Gryffon Loc: Coddenham, Suffolk, England

Yes the cost of the inks is worth finding out about before buying the printer, but you are right, Epson and Canon are both readily available.
Cheaper are the generic inks but I am a bit hesitant to buy these as I am not sure if they will mess up the print head?

Gitzo Loc: Indiana

Here's how I see it, and this is only my opinion, for what it may or may not be worth; about so-called, "third party" or "generic" inks; I have used them; I few years ago, I had a pretty inexpensive Epson printer, and I used it mainly for printing CD jewel case inserts and labels; to keep my costs minimal, I used 100% generic ink; I didn't have any problems with the printer, due to the ink; (keeping in mind, because I was using it in a low cost printer, there wasn't a whole lot to lose, even if I had gummed up the thing with the cheaper ink ). So for what I was doing at the time, that ink served the purpose.

Right now, I'm starting to think about buying a bigger, more expensive, more "capable" ink jet photo printer, but I'll be using it for a completely different purpose. I'll be printing both photos and art work for exhibition in a gallery setting, so for this purpose, I'll really need all of the quality inherent in a more expensive ink jet photo printer. I haven't made any firm decisions as yet, about the printer OR the ink. But as of right now, I'm really thinking along the lines of probably using the ink sold by the printer manufacturer; and I'm still looking at all the issues, in order to decide between a Canon or an Epson printer.

As I see it, the more money you have invested in a printer, the more it behooves one to read up on current printer technology prior to making an investment. Printers are a little like computers, in that the "tech" surrounding them moves ahead quite fast; if you get away from either for any period of time, you quickly become seriously "out of date" in what ever knowledge you may have. All the more reason to do a lot of research before spending your money, I suppose.

Before I forget this......one more decision one must make in choosing printer ink; overall, inks use two different technologies; inks using dye, and those using pigments;
pigment based inks are said to be more permanent, while dye based inks are said to exhibit somewhat brighter, more vibrant colors; right off the top of my head, I'm thinking that would lead me to possibly go with a Canon printer using a dye based ink, as I need the best color I can get. (And at my age, I'm not sure being "worried" about "permanence" is all that important ).

FOUNTAINMAN

HI;
I HAVE USED ALL 3 OF MAIN BRRANDS HAVE A 15 Y OLD HP PHOTOSMART 1000 STILL GIVING GOOD SERVICE[SLOW] ALSO HAVE CANON S9000 GREAT PICTURES BUT HIGH MAINTANACE TO KEEP IT RUNING ALSO COSTOF INK IS VERY HIGH DO TO AGE'RECENTLY 2 Y BACK I GOT A HP PHOTOSMART A409C [ALL IN ONE] USES 564 CART.S 4 COLL CART S PLUS BLACK FOR DOCUMENTS.VERY GOOD COLLOR PRINTS AVGE PRINT SPEED.IF YOU RESEARCH YOU WILL FIND THE564 IS THE LATEST INK FORMULA GOOD SHOPING.I ALSO HAD AN EPSON SEV,YEARS BACK HI MAINTANACE.

kubota king Loc: NW , Pa.

i don't want to start a war , so please do not jump all over my butt. I had trouble with ebson printers and also read many times on the web from other owners of ebson printers had the same problem , unlike HP printers which has the print head in the ink cartridge ,ebson does not. If you don't print something often , the ink dries up and plugs the printer head , which can be hard at times to get working correctly again ,and sometimes I had to throw the printer away. I may print a lot of photos one time , then nothing for a month or so . With the HP I never run into a drying of the ink problem . I cant speak for canon , I never had one . I am just saying from my experience . You can ask other ebson owners if they had the same problem before you decide .

Lightwips Loc: Almonte, Ontario

How about an enlarger and 4 trays. Hell its cheap when compared to the price of ink. Don

J-SPEIGHT Loc: Akron, Ohio

I use an HP photosmart also have an epson, use epson and HP inks and paper its a matter of preference I prefer the HP

jerrylh Loc: Texas

I got an Epson 837 about 6 months ago. It does a great job and is far better then the Canon MX-850 I had. I have a friend that just got a refurbished one from Epson for $110.List is $239.
An article I read some months ago said ink cost was the highest for Canon printers. Epsons were high too. The only printer that had really good ink cost was an HP 8600, only about 40% of the canon, but this printer is not rated high for photos. A printer repair man told me that Canons usually wear out quicker than any other printers in general, he said they are designed that way. He favored HPs, but he does not do color, always buys that out.

Atomicmechanic Loc: Corinth New York

I usually use my Camera store that I have been dealing with for 26 years now. I do have a few printers here at the house for my personal use. The HiTi dye sub printer is great if you only use it once every couple of weeks or so as it can't clog up the ink jets, it has none. I've used Kodak, Canon, Epson, and HP photo printers, all with great results. Normally, I print a couple of pictures here at the house, critique them, and then go to the camera store and have them all printed there. The better printers have more ink cartridges, and therefore a higher expense, so for me it's easier and simpler to just have them printed for me.

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

A Renaissance man! :thumbup: :thumbup: