Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Printers > Photo Inkjet

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 15, 2003, 5:11 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default HP photosmart 7260, any advice?

My parents have a digital camera, but no computer. They consider buying a HP photosmart 7260, for reasons of cheap, capable of A4 and praised by advertisement. They have good sense of color, print technique and final photos will be used for art portfolio.

Looking at two other HP Photosmart models reviewed by Steve they seem either too blue or too yellow. Would the HP photosmart 7260 be any good? I can't find any reviews for this specific printer, let alone a comparative scan. Your 0.02$ is valued, please any wise words /images of this printer?
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 20, 2003, 4:42 PM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 97
Default

All the new HP Photosmarts are going to give the same print quality...their engines are identical with the only differences between the models being chassis features (LCD, paper trays...), speed and the extra 3-black cartridge.

What kind of camera do you have?
pdxbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 20, 2003, 5:44 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

They have a Nikon 4300, that should be enough for A5/A4. However prints will be inspected closeby due to subject. The print sexy rule of 2mP photo of pin-up girl printed on A1 will not work in this case, prints have to be good color and detail quality.
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2003, 11:23 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 97
Default

Have you considered a Canon i900D? Same features as the HP with the direct printing w/o PC but you don't get the color casting and there are individual ink tanks! Read Steve's i960 review as they engine between the two printers are the same, just the i900D has direct print features on the outside.

Also have you looked at the Olympus dye sublimation?

You can also go to most retailers with a digital cam card print your pics and see how you like them. Look for a strage grid pattern when you look closely at the new Photosmart photos. It is interesting...
pdxbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 21, 2003, 6:41 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

Thanks Pdxbrian for confirming what I suspected. Coincidental I saw some Canon photoprinters today in a shop and had the feeling that these would be better choice than HP. The I900 seems not yet to be on market in Europe.
The Olympus dye sublimation is indeed a great printer, but a bit expensive (also if they at later moment have a computer and want to use same printer to print a simple text file)

I will urge them to wait for the i900 (I think colors are better than Epson photo 1280/1290)
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2003, 6:12 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 8
Default

I've also been curious about the low end HPs.

In the review of the 7960 on photo-i, they briefly discuss the differences between the 7960 and all other 7x60s. See http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/int...960/page_1.htm The 7960 has Photo Ret Pro, and the lesser models have Photo Ret IV, and it appears to make a difference. Now if only someone would review a lesser model...
oldabelincoln is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2003, 6:55 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 386
Default

The HP use different photo ret? That makes sense.

By chance of luck I saw a HP 7260 in a shop with official example print. I must say, it seems a tiny bit too blue to me. Also something to note (I just remembered) : Cheap printers can be this cheap because the enduser is lured into buying the same brand inkt and papers.

Ofcourse with HP you are free to fill the poor defenceless cartriges with anything you like, they are the print head and easy to remove for cleaning. But still even third parties inkt are higher price for HP than other brands (I have not checked inkt price for this model).

I think the choice for printers is still Canon or Epson. Epson printers are known to waste too much inkt on head cleaning routine, that leaves Canon as only choice. The 6 seperate transparant inkt tanks with some models are very cool (especially in the eyes of an Epson user). There are ofcourse photocard printers, that compete in quality, but those cannot print A4 (text).

Another thing is not to worry too much about cost per page. If difference is 10 C per A4 photo than you have to print each month 100 photos to make a difference of 10$ p.m. in use. If you look at the difference of cost total per printer per lifecycle I have a feeling that for average use the cost somewhat balances. (unless you use an Epson at random basis and waste more than half inkt on head cleaning routine, grrpf. )
Mathilde uP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2003, 11:20 AM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 97
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldabelincoln
I've also been curious about the low end HPs.

In the review of the 7960 on photo-i, they briefly discuss the differences between the 7960 and all other 7x60s. See http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/int...960/page_1.htm The 7960 has Photo Ret Pro, and the lesser models have Photo Ret IV, and it appears to make a difference. Now if only someone would review a lesser model...
Makes sense...doens't really say anything as to how it is different though. Is it just the ability to have 3 cartidges in there, including the #59 tri-black?
pdxbrian is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:20 AM.