Source: Tom's Guide | Keywords: photo, printers, pictures | Themes: Digital Cameras
1. Presenting The Options
Summer is a great season for taking photos. Not only is the weather beautiful (well, usually), but you also spend time with your family, travel, relax and inevitably wish you could immortalize all those moments of pure happiness in photos.
Once you’ve filled up your memory card, you’re probably going to decide to print all or at least some of your snapshots…
Why print at home?
When it comes to printing your photos, you’ve got several options: do it online, go to a store where you can print them out in person or buy a compact photo printer of your own. It’s that last option we want to explore today.
These days, for less than $250, you can have a high-performance option for printing photos at home, thanks to which you’ll be able to print some of your most beautiful images in just a few minutes. Whether you go ink jet or thermal, these printers have the advantage of being easily transported and are ready to print out photo after photo. Even without its benefit of speed, this method of printing is desirable: it is only a little more expensive per image than your other options.
For our comparison, we’ve chosen four flagship models currently at the top of their game. As a bonus, we also present an astonishing little gadget, the Polariod PoGo. But before all that, let’s start by checking out the material at hand.
- Next page The Selected Models
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!