A recent owner of a Nikon D700, Can anybody recommend a good Photo Printer?

<p>I was wondering if somebody could recommend a good Photo printer. I want to be able to print up to 8 X 10 photos. Thank you</p>

<p>I have an Epson R800. I don't use it often enough so sometimes use more ink than I'd like on cleaning cycles versus little "test" prints. I'm not sure I'd not consider a larger printer, space permitting, if there is a next time, because the consumables cost is the same. Since this one is doing fine, I haven't kept up with other possibilities that may have been released since I got this one.</p>

<p>Alfred,<br>

I have the original Canon Pro 9000 printer. There is an updated version now for this printer that can adapt the print to different lighting. I printed a number of photos and hung them at work. Colleagues keep asking me make them prints for them. The printer uses dye ink and can print up to 13 x 19 inch prints. I rate this Canon printer as near excellent.<br>

Jose' </p>

<p>I have Canon i9900 and I don't like it (it's a model from 2006) because it is inkjet, and it needs to "dry" for 24 hours and even after 48 hours of "drying" it can leave a mark on the glass you mount it behind, because the paint is on the surface of the paper. Also the edges become very fragile, it's easy to chip off the paint by accident.<br>

The printing in the labs on inkjet printers seems to be of better quality (if they know what they're doing) and dye-based printers seem to do a good job. My printer was $500 but i think you have to spend over $2000 on a "Pro" printer to get Pro results. Then the ink or dye cost can be high, it usually is for the under $1000 ink-jet printers.</p>

<p>I have a Epson 2200 thats works great. Its slow and a ink hog but produces excelleny results.<br>

I also have a Kodak 8500 Dry Lam pinter that produces 8x10s only. They the best prints that I can make, but they run about $1.70 each. The come out better than pro labs.</p>

<p>I am very happy with the canon mp620, it's wireless and prints very well</p>

<p>M-Pix, Shutterfly or Adoramapix (or any of the dozens of other online printers) will save you a fortune in hardware, consumables and heartache, and the results will also likely be better than you will get from a home inkjet unless you really know what you are doing.</p>

<p>I use an Epson Stylus Photo R380 which uses 8.5 X 11 inch paper. I use Ilford Galerie inkjet paper and in most cases get prints as good as a dye sub printer. Since I make few very large (above 8 X 10) prints since printer works real well for me and I don't have to waste ink cleaning the heads all the time. I send my very large prints to an online lab. </p>

<p>I use an Epson R285 (R290) - very happy with the print quality.<br>

Alvin</p>

<p>Pictures printed with inkjet printers and gloss paper will fade in and unreasonably short time and in some cases a very short time unless the printed pictures are stored in a frame under glass or in a archival album. Dye Sublimation printeres offer lab like quality prints and durability. </p>

<p>I use a Kodak Pro 1400 printer and an Olympus P440 printer (both dye subs) and both work reasonably well. Although the hardware is inexpensive (you can get a used P440 for $50 to $100 or so), consumables are not - it costs about $1.50 per print. Since you can buy true lab quality 8 x 10s for less with better results than any home printer can give you, unless you need the convenience of a printer in your home or office, photo labs continue to be the best choice.</p>

<p>photo lab!</p>

<p>While we're at it, can anybody think of a current model 8.5x11 printer (not a larger printer that can print 8.5x11 but a "normal" sized printer) that uses pigment inks and/or is as good as the R800? My R800 is scrod and I realized there's no replacement out there and ended up buying a uses R1800, but I'm kind of surprisd Epson never made an R900.</p>

<p>For good high quality prints, an Epson R2880 is the way to go. It uses pigment based inks with good archival quality. You can go up to 13" wide paper if need be and I do a lot printing on 13x19 paper. There are some good rebates on it right now. If you plan on doing a lot of printing and on some larger paper sizes, Epson have a new R3880 coming out next month. You can get the prior model, 3800 with a hefty discount right now but it does not use the new vivid magenta ink and there will be a slight difference in the color from the newer model. You also get the advantage of Epson's ABW driver for black and white printing which gives you wonderful prints.</p>

<p>I second the R2880, I'm very, very, happy with mine. <br>

I used an Epson 1400 with MIS UT14 black inkset and the 2880 is equal to that set-up, plus I can print a color image now with the same quality. If it's not absolutely perfect, adjust in PS and re-print. You may spend a little more on paper and ink, but in my opinion watching that print exit the printer is half the fun. </p>

<p>All my Epson nkjet prints from a few years ago have faded baded. I threw them all in the trash. If you have a nice professional digital Nikon SLR avail yourself with an image editing program such as Photoshop CS4 and Optics DxO, calibrate your monitor, and have your prints made on traditional photgraphic paper via either White House Custom Color or Millers lab.</p>

<p><br />Thanks guys for all your responses! Looks like I have a lot of research to do. I have yet to print out one of my photos from my new Nikon D700. I sure would like to see the results of the photo before buying one. </p>

<p>another vote for the Epson R2880. For both colour and B&W output it is nothing short of amazing!</p>

<p>I used to own an Epson R800, a great little printer but if you are considering B&W output with that machine FORGET IT!</p>

<p>Even the Epson R2400 is a decent printer, despite it's age. It's color and b&w output is very good. And if you're only thinking of printing 8x10 it might be a good and more affordable solution. I would stay away from anything less than the 2400 though. The R1800 and R1900 are both horrible.</p>

<p>Having said that, I also agree with everyone else. The R2880 is very good. I use a 3800 but those are pretty expensive.</p>

<p>The Kodak ESP line will save you a lot of money on ink and prints very good pictures with pigment ink. The ESP 3 is generally available for less than $100; the color cartidge is $15, the black is $10.<br>

Wilhelm Research rates Kodak Photo papers printed with their ubiquitous #10 pigment ink cartridges framed under glass from a low of 120 years for Kodak Premium 4 star glossy to a high of 260 years for Kodak Ultra Premium; under glass with a UV filter, longevity for most Kodak photo papers increases to 300 years as does dark storage in a photo album in controlled temperature and humidity.<br>

I print a lot more pictures with it just because the ink is such a bargain, and the pictures generally come out looking the same as they do on my computer screen.<br>

Two weaknesses: Kodak doesn't make any 12x18 or bigger printers, and there are no drivers for the Linux or BSD operating systems.</p>

<p> </p>