Showing 1 of 26 conversations about:
SalParadise
23
Apr 9, 2017
bookmark_border
I have this model. It's a fine copier/printer. The duplex document feeder is convenient. AirPrint setup was painless, Google Cloud Print was a little more involved, but both features are worth setting up if you have devices that need them.
Ink tanks are not cheap (surprise!) and the printer seems to slurp it up. I always buy the XL and XXL tanks, under the assumption that I'm getting more ink per $. If not, at least I'm not changing tanks as often as I would be with the regular size tanks.
The only annoying thing about this printer is it wants to tell you that you had a power outage, and won't let you print anything until you acknowledge its status message.
I hope this is a successful drop, and I hope MassDrop decides to start offering ink tank drops. I would buy tanks in bulk if I could save some serious money on them.
Apr 9, 2017
FusionWarrior
12
Apr 9, 2017
bookmark_border
Because the black ink 250 is Pigment based, you are... however if you want to save real money, and don't own this machine for the photo quality, then you should switch it for the HP OfficeJet Pro 8600/8610/8710, or the Brother Inkvestment J985. These machines run full pigment sets, and while the up front is a bit more expensive (On the HP really, the brother is actually cheaper for the carts) your cartridges are going to easily give you 4-8 times more pages. Think having a color laser printer at half to a quarter of the cost.
Apr 9, 2017
zanzabar
21
Apr 9, 2017
bookmark_border
250 is dye based the 251 are pigment. This printer also uses the 250 only for normal black and does no use color for black prints like printers that have a dynamic or enhanced black. Since it has photo grade colors that can make a photo black it is a bit different than normal.
The 86xx and 87xx are also cheaper per print than consumer or single user office laser jets. But they cannot print accurate color.
Apr 9, 2017
FusionWarrior
12
Apr 9, 2017
bookmark_border
True but it makes up for it in pure reliability and cost effectiveness. I can sleep well with my wallet despite sacrificing my favorite color, purple. And for simple home use, the 86/87xx is king.
Apr 9, 2017
zanzabar
21
Apr 9, 2017
bookmark_border
This one has a similar cost per page in black and white if you get the XXL since the 950 is a cheap dye, but then it does almost Epson photo printer quality with the pigments too. The 86xx has amazing speed for a home unit, lower cost than small color laser for black or color prints and the scanner with OCR and duplexing for under $200 is great as well if you don't go for the base model.
Apr 9, 2017
FusionWarrior
12
Apr 10, 2017
bookmark_border
The downside for non photo/artistic users of the pixma 922 is that the color ink will dry up and become useless at a much faster rate than pure pigment dye based printers like the Maxify and the 86/87xx series machines, meaning color ink replacement will be necessary more often, regardless of use.
Apr 10, 2017
zanzabar
21
Apr 10, 2017
bookmark_border
The pigments are petrol based and dry. The dye dries out and is water based. The 950 carts will dry but the color ones won't. The maxify (at least at launch) were the HP 8600 printer but sold under Canon with a different case and scanner (cannon makes the print parts for HP).
Apr 10, 2017
SalParadise
23
Apr 11, 2017
bookmark_border
Good point. If you don't need to print photos, there are better choices out there.
Apr 11, 2017
FusionWarrior
12
Apr 11, 2017
bookmark_border
It's a shame then that that the Maxify ink is less cost effective than the 86xx and the 87xx then. It's not by much, but the ink is more expensive per page than the HP options where I shop for ink.
Apr 11, 2017
zanzabar
21
Apr 12, 2017
bookmark_border
I have not worked retail in about a year so I dont remember the exact numbers, but the big maxify had 25% smaller carts than the hp did and they were less common so the mark up was higher. the little maxify was a nice idea but poor form factor since it had the print mechanism from the larger machine and was cheaper to run than the 6000 series HP and they dont have the paper feed problems that series always does when they are not leaning back.
Apr 12, 2017
DannC
1
Oct 28, 2018
bookmark_border
I've had this model for a couple of years myself. I don't use it for photo printing (I have the Canon Pro-100 for that) but for basic printing, scanning and faxing, it works great. Prior to that I've had Epson printers which for the Colorado dry climate would often have issues with the heads clogging and I couldn't get them unclogged. The scanning software for allowing scanning directly to the PC is pretty basic, but gets the job done. I am able to scan to my Mac and also print fine from the Mac as well. Had no issues installing the Canon software on it, though I did that a few years back. Pros:
  • it just works. Never had issues with it outside of the occasional paper jam
  • Built-in Fax which works with my Comcast basic voice line.
  • Third-party ink works well with it, bringing down the printing costs a bit
  • Google Cloud Print, though I had to add a static DHCP entry in my router
Cons:
  • Clunky software for scanning and such.
  • Not super fast in printing (but not dog slow either)
  • Printer driver for some reason likes to sometimes default to printing 4x6 instead of Letter
Oct 28, 2018
View Full Discussion