i have a canon pixma ip1600....yes i like it, except for not having a paper tray...although what can you expect for under $50.00, right???
Quick, superb photos, cheap to operate. This is my second Canon printer - this one was to upgrade from Canon S600 - never any issues. What more can one ask for? I recommend Canon to all who ask me. I'm a computer tech.
Last year's iP3000, 4000, 5000, etc. were it. Unfortunately Canon saw fit to go with tanks with active tech in them that no one has been able to clone yet. And some of the cheap models actually have integrated heads. So long Canon - glad I have my iP3000 for as long as it lasts. Maybe someone will have cloned the new tanks by the time it dies...
. About the only one looking out for their customers any more is Brother - the only one left still making inkjet printers (well, their MFCs) that use passive ink tanks. Too bad they have had this defective print head problem. (Error 41, etc.)
. I've had great luck with ink from http://www.swiftink.com and Staples' mid-grade photo paper - great prints! and often on sale.
.bh.
Using small computers since 1980.
I don't know how long you have used the clones, but they are a bad deal. In time, if they don't completely destroy your printer, you will find that they at the very least will take many (official Canon tanks) to clean your print heads in order to get the proper colors back. Besides all that, I have found that the clones are about half full. By the time you pay shipping, they are more expensive than going to Best Buy or any other store that carries a lot of electronic equipment. My very old Canon printer has 6 separate tanks so you don't have to change all colors when you only run out of one. The tanks are only $12.00 each. Now Canon has a printer with 8 separate tanks. A little pricier than others, but a very nice printer.
Ditto for me... I have a Canon iP5000 printer and I totally love it. It still uses the BCI-3e Black and the BCI-6 color ink tanks, which are really inexpensive. It also has 2 paper sources, so I keep regular 24 lb. paper in the top feed, and 4X6 photo paper in the tray. Plus, it duplexes (prints both sides of the page)- something I've been looking for in an inkjet for a very long time. And it prints excellent photos. I hope it lasts at least as long as my Canon S600 printer did, and the only reason it died was cheap generic ink, which clogged a print head to the point it finally couldn't be cleaned. I'm not planning on using anything in the iP5000 except genuine Canon ink.
Robert
This has been a great printer for me. It's an all in one, print, fax, copy, scan and photo. Ink is reasonably priced. It has an ink tank for each color and the print head is separate, meaning the tanks are loaded into the print head. It has two black ink tanks, a small one, that is the same size as the color tanks, for color printing and a larger one, which is used only for the black and white printing. It has numerous features and good control of ink usage. I can print a picture or graphics, which look nice and sharp, good contrast, without soaking the paper with ink. It's fast too, once it starts printing. I've owned Lexmark and HP in the past, but I think I will be sticking with the Cannon name brand from here on out.
Like most items, the Dell 3000cn color laser printer has some great features but it is lacking in others that one would expect a printer developed for businesses would have. The cost per sheet is great, when compared to an ink jet printer, if you do not factor in the initial cost of the printer and all the supplies necessary for initial usage.
The black print is very good; however, print in color is not vivid and cannot compete with a good ink jet printer. Also, the Dell 3000cn will not (1) print on both sides simultaneously, (2) print in half tones, or will it (3) collate!
Good afternoon,
I must take issue with you on your assessment of the Dell 3000. I have been around these printers and loved them from the start. I think Dell has once again produced a capital product that will please its users for years to come (or at least as long as it takes them to introduce an even better printer!). Of course, one must consider that my experience is based on office use, where excellent colour is not the most important of the features...but it still seems excellent to me. The print speed in black rivals the reigning Xerox 8500/8550 series, and though colour speed could be somewhat better, it's not horrific. The one admittedly bad thing about this printer is that the cost of toner cartridges are extrodinarily expensive, almost the cost of a printer replacement. Still I have been able to reduce the cost of toner by using compatibles...I've used a place called Supplies Guys with superb success (http://www.suppliesguys.com). Overall, I think if you deem the printer a failure, you may not have had realistic expectations to begin with, friend.
I switched from an HP printer-scanner-copier to an Epson, and here's why: the Epson inks are superior. My HP worked fine but the printed copy was easily smudged or smeared by the least amount of water. Plus, photos or CD labels printed on glossy stock seemed to *never* dry - if I touched a glossy CD label 24 hours after printing, it would smudge and leave me with ink on my fingers! The Epson rep at Fry's sold me on the Epson Durabright inks, which are chemically unique and have none of the above problems. Waterproof and archival for decades. Very happy with the difference.
I use the Canon S800. I love the 6 separate tanks and the quality of the photos. I also use a Canon Compact dye sublimation printer for printing on the spot it id the CP 330. I need to replace my S800 though. I will get the a Pixma with 8 separate ink tanks. I don't remember the model number. I have already seen the photos they print. It is quite old though. I am sold on it. I recommend Canon for anyone. You will get only what you pay for though. None of the cheaper printers print as nicely as the more expensive ones. You won't find them at the usual stores(Best Buy, Staples, Office Depot or Office Max.) I buy everything from Canon on the phone.
I forgot to mention before that my Canon printer was more expensive when I bought it, you only replace the color that is empty. At $8.00 to $12.00 each, not as expensive as replacing several colors when one color is empty.
G'day,
Yeah this is a good little printer for print, copy, scan.
The resolution of the scan is good enough to allow crisp looking enlargements of photos. The cannon photo wizard software is also good for improving scanned pics before I print them.
As for printer paper, I always go for the name brands, currently using photo glossy A4 Kodak paper.
I have had this printer for a few years now. Everything is great when I use EPSON paper, but when I try to use KODAK paper, I get a big SCRATCH down the side of the prints. This has happened with HP paper as well. I generally use the glossy photo paper for most prints. This printer also makes excellent "water color" prints with Epson Art Paper. The inks in this machine are archival, and no "refill" replacement cartridges give you the same lifetime warranty against fading as does the EPSON inks.
I also have an older EPSON Stylus Photo 800, which still gives great color prints as long as the cartridge has not been sitting in the machine too long. If a couple weeks go by without using the printer, I get the old "lines across the print" from irregular printing when I start it up again.
For all regular black and white printing, all normal stuff, I still use my old HP LaserJet 4, which is like the Bunny Commercial for Batteries -- it just keeps going and going and going, and believe me, I go through a LOT of paper!
I HAVE THE LEXMARK 715, WHICH WORKS WELL FOR MY NEEDS. THE ONLY GRIPE , IS AS WITH ALL PRICES ON THE INK . THE PRINTER CAME WITH THE DEAL FROM AOL, BUT THE COST OF THE INKS REALLY IS OUT OF SIGHT.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |