How does the HP 930/932/950 compare to older HP models?

How does the HP 930/932/950 compare to older HP models?

Post by Dan Hardin » Sat, 06 May 2000 04:00:00



Specifically, the 720/722 series. My current printer is an
HP 720. I'm quite happy with its printing on plain paper,
but I'd like something a little nicer on glossy. I use
the Kodak Glossy (117 lb) photo paper and while I like
the results, I'm not astounded by them.

I saw a print sample at Office Depot from the 932 and it
looked absolutely fabulous; then again, there was no way
to compare it with output from my current printer.

I guess my question is how *MUCH* better is the photo
quality on the 932 (PhotoRet III vs. II) than on my 720?
Is it worth replacing the printer.

I know all the rage right now is the Epson 870/1270, but
(1) I've been extremely happy with the reliability of
my HP 720, (2) From the guestimates I've seen, the Epson
will soon bankrupt me in ink costs compared to my HP
(although I have no idea whether the ink usage data on
the new 932 is more or less than my 720), (3) clogged
jets, 'nuff said, and (4) big difference in price: The
best I've seen in the Epson 870 is $279, while I can get
an HP 930C for $177.

So, how much of a jump will I see in photo quality at the
highest settings?

Also, is there anything in the same price range (<$200)
that even competes with the 932 on photo quality?

Thanks in advance,

-Dan

 
 
 

How does the HP 930/932/950 compare to older HP models?

Post by Travisimo » Sun, 07 May 2000 04:00:00




Quote:>I guess my question is how *MUCH* better is the photo
>quality on the 932 (PhotoRet III vs. II) than on my 720?
>Is it worth replacing the printer.

The upgrade from PhotoRET II to III is definitely noticeable.  The
dots were noticeable on the II printers even from a normal viewing
distance (not bad, but noticeable).  The dots on the III printers are
not noticeable unless you inspect at a very close distance (less than
a foot).  These are just my observations, however.  If you've got the
money, I would suggest the upgrade.  The difference isn't enormous,
but definitely worth it IMO.

Quote:>I know all the rage right now is the Epson 870/1270, but
>(1) I've been extremely happy with the reliability of
>my HP 720, (2) From the guestimates I've seen, the Epson
>will soon bankrupt me in ink costs compared to my HP
>(although I have no idea whether the ink usage data on
>the new 932 is more or less than my 720), (3) clogged
>jets, 'nuff said, and (4) big difference in price: The
>best I've seen in the Epson 870 is $279, while I can get
>an HP 930C for $177.

I'm sure the die-hard 870/1270 users will certainly try to convince
you to buy one anyway.  Some of the reasons you listed, however, are
valid.  

(1) I too have been pleased with the reliability of my HP printers
over the years.  

(2) I don't think the ink consumption on the 870/1270 is much more
than the 970/1220... the ZDNet article someone pointed out a short
time ago listed the HP but not the Epson, but Epson's website lists
their color cartridge lifespan and from my calculations (I will post
them if you'd like), they are pretty similar.  Of course, this depends
on what print settings you use, how much coverage, etc.   The thing
that I was adamant about was that you can use ink refills in the HP
but not the Epson 870/1270.  I just started using the refills for my
HP 1220 and let me tell you the quality is identical and MUCH cheaper
(not to mention very easy to do too).

(3) Epson 870/1770 fanatics will tell you that Epson's don't have
problems with cloggings, but I've seen a good deal of them on various
message boards.  I certainly wouldn't say that you should *expect*
problems, but it's more likely on the Epson than the HP's since the
HP's have the head built in the cartridge.  Yes, the carts are more
expensive, but since you can refill them (and not the Epson's), I see
that as a big advantage.  Plus, I've never had to worry about
cloggings on any of my HP printers.

(4) Price, yes.  Since the 932 is a lower speed (but same print
quality) printer, you won't be paying as much.  This is a person issue
with you, of course so comment is not really neccessary.

Quote:>So, how much of a jump will I see in photo quality at the
>highest settings?

The new HP printers can do Draft, Normal, Best (PhotoRET) and Best
(2400x1200).  The PhotoRET setting does a decent job with prints
(better than the PhotoRET II printers, obviously) but the 2400x1200
mode looks even better.  I've made several prints at 8x10, 10x13 and
11x14 and they all look wonderful.  The 11x14's have a few "jaggies"
but that's because I'm only using 1600x1200 digital camera pics.  Now
the Epson fanatics can point you to websites that show enlargements of
prints and compare the HP to the Epson - but it's your eyes (and the
eyes of those who receive your pictures) that matters.  I've seen the
prints from an Epson 870 and the difference seems negligible to me at
normal viewing distances.  At close inspection, I would concede that
the Epson does look better.  At any rate, the prints made from the HP
look wonderful to me and those I have made prints for.

Hopefully, this helps a little.  My suggestion would be to try the 932
and see for yourself and if you aren't happy, return it.

Travis

 
 
 

How does the HP 930/932/950 compare to older HP models?

Post by Dan Hardin » Tue, 09 May 2000 04:00:00



> The upgrade from PhotoRET II to III is definitely noticeable.  The
> dots were noticeable on the II printers even from a normal viewing
> distance (not bad, but noticeable).  The dots on the III printers are
> not noticeable unless you inspect at a very close distance (less than
> a foot).  These are just my observations, however.  If you've got the
> money, I would suggest the upgrade.  The difference isn't enormous,
> but definitely worth it IMO.

This is what I was hoping. The 932 is right now considerably lower
than my 720 cost originally (I paid $279 for my 720; right now
buy.com has the 932 for $163.95 + shipping = $176.90), and I've
found someone who wants to buy my 720, so the net upgrade cost
will be < $100. Works for me.

I'm guessing that the 932 will at lease be somewhat faster than
my 720? (the 720 is a completely dumb printer, relying entirely
on the CPU for processing; I don't recall what the RAM buffer is
on the 720, if any).

Thanks for the info!

-Dan

 
 
 

How does the HP 930/932/950 compare to older HP models?

Post by Jimba » Tue, 09 May 2000 04:00:00


They all seem to be pretty nice printers except for the fact that they all seem
to have a print skew problem.
 
 
 

1. HP Deskjet 950/952 and 930/932

I was excited to see these printers were released.  I had about made up my
mind to buy the Lexmark Z51 because the HP 970C was so expensive and Lexmark
relatively cheap.  Now I am re-thinking this decision.

Where can these printers be purchased?  I can't find them through
pricegrabber or pricewatch, and they are not in the computer magazines I
have received recently.

Someone made a post about it being a mistake to buy directly from HP and I
can't remember why.  Does anyone else remember the post?

Thanks

2. DC Area Testers Needed

3. Difference between Hp 932 & Hp 930

4. UNIX Utility on Amiga?

5. Refill Volume for HP C6578D (HP 930/932/970 color cart.)?

6. Index with Ltoc

7. HP 930 and HP 950 Color Quality

8. HP 930/932 ink level question

9. Diff btwn HP 930, 932 & 935?

10. HP 930 or 932??

11. HP deskjet 930/932 incompatibility w/ IE5

12. HP 930/950 at COMPUSA