Customer Reviews

Canon S820 Photo Inkjet Printer

5 star:		(36)
4 star:		(12)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(12)

 

 

I bought a S820 to replace my old Epson Stylus Color 600. I'm totally blown away by the speed and quality of the output. Printed an image I took with a digital camera on 1 of the free 4x6 Photo Paper Pro samples, I couldn't believe it came out of an inkjet!!
I prefer the S820 over the S820D because of the legacy (parallel port) support and [price] difference. I process all my photos before I print them so the direct print feature in S820D is not important. I liked the idea of the integrated CF reader in the S820D, until I found out that the printer needs to be turned on in order to transfer files to an attached PC. S900 gives the same quality as the S820x but 2x as fast. However, I can't see myself printing more than 30 photos a month, so I can't justifies paying... more for the S900.

Ok, I admit it...I haven't bought a new computer and printer for quite some time, but I am a demanding photography hobbyist always looking for my next photo gadget. Maybe if I quit spending money on cameras I could buy a real computer. Yes, a good idea...so I bought a new Dell PC on a back to school special a few weeks ago.

I hand-picked this printer to go with it. Yes, I could have picked any printer and expected to pay more but after a ton of research, this was the one. Priced at roughly $200, I couldn't believe the value. Amazon[.com]'s price was almost $100 cheaper than my local Circuit City or Staples.

Hooked it up last weekend - took 10 minutes max and I even installed a brand new USB 2.0 card to expand my ports. Love the individual ink tanks...not having to replace colors that haven't gone out is great for the wallet and the environment. The individual cartridges can be replaced for $11.95 and were available at my local Office Max.

I did have to play around with the printer settings. I bought both Canon (at canon's site) and Kodak paper (at Sams club) and started figuring it out. I have a Minolta 4MP S404 and an Epson 2450 scanner. The first photos printed on the Kodak paper were grainy and very non-photo like. Good news followed after about 2-3 attempts with different print settings. The result, virtually photo perfect prints from the Minolta S404. Stunning and unbelievably fast. Best news, the Canon lets you save the perfect print settings once you discover what works the best. Thank goodness, without this "profile" feature I would go nuts.

It was harder to get the same output from my scanner but I upped the scan resolution above 600dpi and the photo print quality has outperformed my wildest expectations. The result is a near perfect copy of the original.

It might be me, but I can't figure out how to make the 4x6 (Kodak paper) work. I have been printing on the larger 8x11 paper and slicing the final photo to size. Also, I got nearly same quality from Kodak and Canon paper with the right settings. For the price, the Kodak paper is a winner with this printer.

Bottom Line: Would buy it all over again, fast, and tremendous output quality for the money.

Cons: Only downside was fooling around with the print settings and saving the print profiles to get consistently good results.

I was looking for a printer mainly for my 20-year inventory of slides and negatives, plus some limited use for B&W documents. Initially I bought the Epson C80, which I returned because I wasn't too happy with its photo quality.

The S820 has far exceeded my expectations. Especially on Canon's Photo Paper Pro, I end up with better quality prints than the photolab. With my scanner (Epson's 2450 -- highly recommended), with Photoshop 6.0, and the S820, I have the perfect digital darkroom.

Main pluses for the S820:
- Perfect photos. The borderless feature works nicely - not the slightest defect at the edges.
- Quick. ~1minute for 4x6 at max resolution
- Robust and quiet.
- Simple: Just a basic on/off button; no need to experiment with the numerous options other printers provide: Just pick the paper type and size and you're fine.
- Economical

Disadvantages: Nothing I can think of.

A few additional comments:
- Use nothing but Canon Photo Paper Pro for your prints. Costs about the same as the Epson paper, but the results in quality are remarkable. It's still difficult to find the paper even online, Canon's site is the only one I found that has both sizes (4x6, 8.5x11). For the 4x6 size, make sure you buy the borderless type, not the perforated type.
- Canon introduced the S820 with three other printers. All seem to have the same photo quality, with the following differences:
* The S820D Can print directly out of memory cards.
* The S900 Faster (8x10 in 1 minute)
* The S9000 Faster, plus can print up to 13x19
I do not think any of these features are worth the extra $$: Though I have a digital camera, I still like printing out of the PC, and I'm happy with the S820's speed as it is.

This is perhaps my best IT purchase in a long time. I couldn't recommend a product more than the s820. Not surprised that most of the online shops are out of stock so quickly...

I've never written a review for anything before, but this printer made me do it. I simply cannot believe what a great printer this is. I researched all of them before this purchase, and I can say without a doubt this is the best printer for home printing of photos out there. I replaced an Epson with this one, and I cannot believe how much better it is... not only the quality (which is FAR superior), but its Quiet... Really Quiet. It Sips ink where the Epson gulped ink, My son was just born 2 months ago, and I have printed at least 100 high res color photos , the ink has hardly dropped. The epson would need a new cartridge by now. Its FAST a little over a minute to print an 8x10(and the S900 is faster)... and the startup is maybe 20 seconds where the epson took over 2 minutes.

The real plus is the quality though.

I know all of the reviewers have said it before, but when you use Canons Photo paper pro, the results are amazing. I can't believe how good the printout is. With my 2.1 megapixel camers, a 4x6 photo is as good or better than conventional film. Scratch that, its better because you can adjust the quality on your computer. No one can believe these are inkjet prints. It does kind of [stunk] that you really need Canons paper for the best prints, (I tried Kodak Ultima, Epson, and HP' premium papers, and while the epson paper works very well, it is not nearly as good as canons pro paper), but Epson's regular glossy photo paper works almost as well as canons regular glossy paper... and I can get 100 sheets of epson paper for 9 bucks at c0stc0.

Canon says if you use their pro paper, the prints are archival quality and will not fade for 25 years. It is really amazing how far the technology has come.

As I said, and I seem to be echoing everyoner elses sentiments, this is one awesome printer.

While I am still testing different printouts of photos, I am amazed so far. The control panel is basic (3 buttons and a round light) but all details can be handled on the computer. Its clear that the S820 is geared for Canon's "Photo Paper Pro", which at the moment is still finding its way to the shelves next to the stock of Epson, HP and Kodak papers. Printouts on the 4X6 Canon paper are astonishing. This is a definite leap forward for home digital photography (for reference, I'm taking pictures with a 4.O megapixel Olympus D-40 at super-high-quality). I'm amazed at the prints and I still have yet to go into Photoshop to tweak the pictures. They really look like traditional glossy photos -- and in some ways even better. (On the Mac I'm still trying to figure out how to bleed the picture to the edge using iPhoto in Mac OS X instead of classic, but I'll figure something out). Overall, my friends can't believe the prints are from an inkjet printer, and my photograher friends who own the new Epson printer appear to be a bit jealous. Finally, for anyone who has used an inkjet printer, the ability to selectively replace individual color cartridges --and not the whole thing-- is a dream. Canon seems to have jumped out ahead of the pack on this one.

After I first bought this printer I thought it was incredible, maybe perfect. But after I've had it for a while I'm more sensitive to its flaws vs. a photo lab, and so am updating my review. First of all, this printer produces incredible output... for an inkjet. I thought I had found something that would make the local photo lab obsolete. At the time I did not know I could just take my digtal pictures to the local photo lab for 1hr processing, just like traditional film. Now that I've discovered this and have been able to compare like pictures on both the printer and from the lab, I can say that the output of this printer is easily inferior to that of a lab.

In some pictures you really can't tell the difference, but I often see a perceptible halftome screen (think hunderds of barly visible dark lines all the way across the print). Certain shades are still a bit grainy, color gamut is a bit weak, and there is way too much detail in shadows. Even when set to the dark setting in the driver, the printouts are too bright. In pictures that have dark areas, there is a somewhat sudden drop off from high shadow detail to sudden pure black(which in the case of the 820 is just not dark enough). Also I now realize that this printer has a nasty habit of really bringing out the noise in pictures that have a moderate amount(it's worst with Photo Paper Pro). Prints from the lab manage to hide this noise altogether.

I must re-emphasize that this printer does an incredible job, but I think if you get this printer and print some photos and then see the same photos side-by-side from a photo lab, you will find it lacking. On the other hand, I'm sure a lot of people will find these print-outs more than adequate.

After doing alot of research into which photo printer to buy I finally settled on the Canon S820. While it's a bit pricey, the incredible results and six individually replaceable ink tanks make it worth every penny. Canon's technology makes it simple to produce spectacular quality photos - as good or better than regular film developing. Setup took all of 10 minutes and I was printing photos right away. There are no slots on this printer for SmartMedia or Compact Flash cards, but for me its just as easy to plug the printer cable (not included) into the back of my laptop where I always download all my images anyway. There is one catch though and that's the fact that the photos are only as good as the paper they're printed on. In this case nothing comes close to Canon's own Photo Paper Pro. I printed the same picture on three different media: Canon's Photo Paper Pro produced a perfect photograph (the color of which the manufacturer claims will last up to 25 years), Kodak premium glossy paper produced acceptable results, while HP premium plus paper produced very poor results. Canon's paper is a little hard to find in stores, but after a quick search on the internet I found a couple of good sources at reasonable prices. Text printing is fine with this machine but that's not why you'd buy it.

After recently buying a new scanner, I realised that is was time to upgrade my 6 year old Epson printer. After all, technology has advanced much in 6 years.

As a photography hobbyist, I wanted something that would match the good scanning ability of the Epson 2450 Photo scanner, which I am quite happy with. Something that would print good quality photos, without leaving the smell of chemicals hanging around the apartment. Why Canon? My research has shown that the running and maintenance costs are much lower than the other brands. Most reviews I have seen put the Canon's output quality a notch higher as well.

Pros:
- Very good photos, particularly when using Pro photo paper. Much better quality than older printers.
- Relatively lower running and maintenance cost (compared to other brands).
- Reasonably fast (fast enough for me). The more expensive siblings are faster.
- The software package is useful (but not great).

Cons:
- Black text (and photos) are not as good as laser printers, while per page cost is higher.
- Canon paper is difficult to find where I live. I don't know if the ubiquitous Epson paper will give the same results.
- Photo paper is expensive. The chemist is still cheaper for development.
- And the chemist's pics may just be sharper and more durable as well.

Summary: Buy this model for colour photos, but you'll need a cheap B&W laser if you want to print lots of documents or B&W photos.

By now you've read the other complimentary reviews of other users. I am a darkroom photoprinter from the "old days" and I never had better results (or as easy) with regular photopaper. The output from two different digital cameras is stunning (3.1 megapixel) The question of various print media problems threw me in deciding to buy, but I have now used both Canon's and Kodak's paper with startling results - although print settings for these two papers differs -- you must use Kodak's or Canon's recommended settings for Kodak papers...

I recently tried the Canon S630 printer...and wound up returning it becuase when printing black text, it smeared to the touch (very annoying). However, I was very impressed with the S630's abilty to print amazing quality color pictures so when I heard Canon was coming out with a new line of printers - I decided to take another chance. This time, though, I decided to plunk down the extra [money] to get the S820.

I'm pleased to report that the problem with the smearing text is not present with this printer (it comes out dry to the touch) and the quality of the color pictures is exceptional (this was less of surprise since I was also impressed with the S630). Becuase this printer uses 5 color cartridges versus 3 color cartridges in the S630 (not including the black cartridge), the colors come out more vivid. The printier is also sturdier and and an overall better build. Well worth the extra $$.