Source: Tom's Guide | Keywords: photo, printers, pictures | Themes: Digital Cameras
- 1. Presenting The Options
- 2. The Selected Models
- 3. For The Beach: Canon Selphy CP770
- 4. Just for fun: Sony DPP-FP95
- 5. More Than a Pretty Face: HP PhotoSmart A826
- 6. Strong All Around: Epson PictureMate 290
6. Strong All Around: Epson PictureMate 290
We’ll finish our comparison with Epson, the printing specialist. Its PictureMate 290 is an extremely well-rounded, simple-to-use device that produces excellent photos.
An ink jet printer, the Epson PictureMate 290 is more cumbersome than its competitors seen here, and is also heavier at nearly seven pounds. It can handle the majority of memory cards (CF, SF, MiniSD, MicroSD, MMC and xD) and is Bluetooth- and PictBridge-camera compatible.
Compared to the competition, this printer distinguishes itself above all by its ability to read and write CDs. It allows you to print photos compiled on CD/DVD, but it also allows you to burn (only on CD) your images, originals or modified versions, whether they come from a card or directly from a camera.
Handling printing and maintenance
This printer’s menu is totally intuitive, which makes navigation fast. Choose the photos you’d like to print and the number of copies you want of each. Among the available effects, we should mention the black-and-white printing, as well as the sepia, the red eye correction and the brightness controls, plus the saturation and contrast settings. In addition to all that, you also have the option to control the maintenance of your machine directly from the menu. You can set it to clean itself automatically or to fix the alignment of the printer heads.
We’re disappointed that (at least in theory) we can’t insert more than 20 sheets of paper into the paper tray. However, the Epson PictureMate 290 is still the fastest photo printer in our test -– with an average of only 37 seconds to print each photo. Lastly, we appreciate that it uses quality paper. Above all, we’re glad that this time there wasn’t any border to rip off (an aberration on other models)!
The PictureMate’s printing is very precise. For example, it does shading perfectly. As for the details in your photos, you’d need a magnifying glass to notice any rough spots, so they’re really not worth worrying about. There is, however, something strange going on with the sepia mode, which seems to print out in a shade of pink.
Our verdict: Where the Epson PictureMate goes astray is its price, which is much higher compared to its competitors, and it doesn’t give us enough to sensibly make up the difference. However, in terms of ergonomics and prints, it answers to absolutely all the criteria we would want when looking for a photo printer.
- Previous page More Than a Pretty Face: HP...
- Next page How Much Does That All Cost?










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...
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!