Just for fun: Sony DPP-FP95

By David Bénard, published on October 2, 2008
Source: Tom's Guide | Keywords: , , | Themes: Digital Cameras

4. Just for fun: Sony DPP-FP95

 
 
The Sony DPP-FF95 has a number of things in common with the Canon Selphy CP770. Its less cumbersome, but it takes a similar ink cartridge and paper stock, though from different proprietary brands. Its printing system is also based on thermal sublimation. Here again you can expect the paper to make three round-trips in and out of the printer as it goes through the steps of yellow, cyan and magenta.
 

The maximum number of printing possibilities

 

With the DPP-FP95, Sony offers a device capable of not only reading the APN-compatible PictBridge, but also memory sticks and SD, xD and CF cards. In addition, the printer uses an HDMI port to display your image on an HD screen (though that’s not the primary use of this printer).

This bright, detachable screen offers menus that are clear and easy to access. They are, by the way, the best-stocked menus of our comparison. From there you can correct red eye or even adjust the brightness, the tints, the saturation and the sharpness of your images. Each time you make a change you have the option to save your modified photos. What’s more, you have access to multiple filters: painting, sepia, monochrome or super wide-angle lens (a goofy mode that deforms images).

As if that all wasn’t enough, the DPP-FP95 offers more creative printing options as well, like the option to superimpose one photo over another or the option to make calendars or ID photos. It’s an original idea and this printer pulls it off perfectly. Everything can be set up directly from your screen.

One last option: the Auto Touch-up. It allows you to instantly fix up a bad photo or to make the most of a good one. It’s also good to know that you can line up your images in a slide show format on your screen (or on your HD TV via the HDMI port).

 

Mediocre printing time

 

Contrary to what the manufacturer claims, you won’t get a photo every 45 seconds with this printer, even if it is faster than the Canon Selphy CP770. Instead, count on an average of 57 seconds per print, once all is said and done. It’s also too bad that the Sony often freezes up between prints, which definitely wastes your time.

Nevertheless, the Sony comes out satisfactory – though it prints slightly differently than the Canon, despite using similar paper and cartridges. The contrast here is more clearly pronounced and the details come out well. The result is very close to the original image.

 
 
 
Our verdict: The variety of printing modes and fun options is the real strong point of the Sony DPP-FP95, which doesn’t suffer from any faults that can’t be overcome. Though it’s a little more expensive than the Canon, it’s still a good investment.

Comments | Print | Send to a friend

Sponsored links

Comments

Chipi 10/02/2008 8:49 PM
Hide
-0+

1. You forgot to mention one important advantage offered by printers that use solid ink with thermal sublimation: photos are said to last for 100 years (that means no color deterioration due to sunlight!), they are protected by the 4th and final laminating layer against water spills and fingerprints (yes, that's right)!
Don't know if it's really 100 years, but the fingerprint "protection" alone makes it a sweet deal.

2. The Epson and HP models aren't exactly portable. They are actually big if you compare them with Sony and Canon, and especially the Polaroid (WOW). A better term would be dedicated photo printers, in my opinion.

3. The Sony FP95 tops at no.2 regarding print time and you call it "mediocre printing time"? If that's true, then what about the others? You haven't even mentioned their performance, except for giving us the values.
I don't want to tell you how to do your job, but if you use only "mediocre" and not "worst" or "best/second-best" use it for the lowest performer.

Sorry Tom, I really am...

Chipi 10/02/2008 9:13 PM
Hide
-0+

I have to say I was expecting an answer from the author, but now I don't thik it really matters. Shortly after my first comment I decided to look into the printers in detail. The HP A626 you talk about in the articke is actualy a A826.

How did you manage to get the name right in the image slideshow? http://www.tomsguide.com/us/slides [...] -jpg-.html

Big thumbs down!

Comments are closed on this page.

Sponsored links