Lexmark X5150

[Bahumut]

I was wondering about the printing cost of this product?
If you could give me either the cost per page or the number of pages per cartridge, that will do.

It uses the same print unit/cartridges as the Z65, so I thought printing cost would be similar. ($.19 c/ $.19 b/w)

This, however, doesn't hold true with HP PCS 2110 or 2210.
They both use the same print unit/cartridges as the deskjet 5550.
($.22 c / $.11 b/w)
In the latest review, they both land around 7.5 cents color and 8 cents b/w. Quite a difference.

I wondered how the same print unit could decrease in cost so much when all you really changed was what is on top.

Turns out, the first review of the HP PCS 2110 put its printing cost at ($.25 c / $.12 b/w). More expensive the the Deskjet 5550 using the same print unit.

I doubt money was slipped under the table. More likely, the price of cartridges changed and/or the firmware was updated to use ink more efficiently. I wish they would post the price of the cartridges they used for the test.

Perhap TH will do a review on the newcomer Lexmark X5150 .... or perhaps I can get my info from one of you before fall.

***All print cost posted were taken directly from TH reviews.***

Pain is the realization of your own weakness.

 

[M39shadow]

If I have learned anything about printing and ink, its that cost per page is a very subjective thing. It depends very heavily on what you're printing (ink coverage per page), quality setting, and the cost of the cartridges. It is not possible to compare one test to another because they are not printing the same page normally. Only direct comparisons (done at the same time) should be treated as valid. In that light it is much like print speed testing and lets face facts, for the average person it matters very little what the page speed is and it will vary alot by what we print.

Further, most ink cost tests involve sustained printing. Something the average person does not do. Most people print in surges unless they are in a business environment that requires frequent printing. Ink cartridge nozzles can start getting clogged in a matter of just a day or two on some models/brands. The problem comes in on how much and how often print head maintenance must be performed to purge dried out ink from the nozzles. Epson for example needs frequent purging. These purge cycles use a lot of ink. You won't see this data anywhere and it varies depending on environment.

From my experience, print costs generally end up being real close to the same unless you print a whole lot (meaning over 1000 pages a month. If you print this much you are better off with a laser printer. The higher cost will be offset by the cheaper page counts. If you don't print much it really doesn't matter, your better off getting the printer with the best print quality than thinking about page costs.

What you really need to look at is how you are going to use the printer. If you aren't going to print much (<50 pages per week) the cost will be close to the same. What may be more important is what you are printing. If you are printing photos on photo paper, it might make more sense to look at factors like print quality and fade resistance of inks. PC World posted a real good article about this based on independant research called The Fade Factor. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,105461,00.asp

Some ink/paper combinations will fade in less than a year while other will last a lifetime.

 

[Bahumut]

Print cost is pretty subjective, I agree. However, I can normally tell when one printer is significantly cheaper to use than another.

Even if nobody gives me a number, which I would have taken pretty subjectively anyways, a comparison to another printers cost will suit my purposes.

Thanks for the site, but I've already done my homework as far as print quality, scan quality, ease of use, ect. is concerned. Otherwise I would've went straight for Cannon's model (lowest print cost, great scanning, not so great ink, I wouldn't trust any MFP to their ink system).

To make this easier, I'm trying to decide between an HP PSC2210 and the Lexmark X5150. I know HP produces better photos, and Lexmark has the better looking text. I don't know about the scan quality on the Lexmark, but I suspect this model switched over to the new technology that Cannon and HP are now using. So this should be comparable.

If anyone has has quirks or pleasant surprises with either printer mentioned, that would help me out. Please spare me the technical data. Chances are pretty good that I've read it. Comparisons to other printers would also be very helpful.

Pain is the realization of your own weakness.

 

[M39shadow]

I can't really tell you about the scan quality of the Lexmark. I have a PSC 2210 setting at my desk though and its scan quality is very good. Unlike several other inexpensive all-in-ones it has the same scanner as HP's latest flatbed scanners. If the scan function is important to you, take some samples into a store and scan with both. Try to pick some stuff that scanners (and copiers) normally have trouble with like bright colors and high contrast.

The text print quality on my 2210 looks very good. It all depends on what quality setting you use of course and the 2210 has 4 different settings available. Text appears very crisp to me at Normal or Best modes while the economy and everyday modes use less ink and are acceptable for rough drafts.

My take is that the 2210 will do a lot more than the Lexmark, and if you are into digital photography, the card slots on the 2210 are awesome. You might want to look at the support for both as well. Visit the online support sites and see what kind of information is available. Lexmark's seems a bit lacking to me. According to HP's web site they now have a 24/7 1-800 number too.

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by m39shadow on 05/05/03 10:10 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Bahumut]

Thanks m39shadow. The scanner info was one of my concerns. However, I've got a few new questions for you. Let me set them up first.

I just saw a new article here at Tom's comparing photo printers. Two things of interest were the printout from the X5150 and the Deskjet5550 (Equivalent to the PCS 2210).
<A HREF="http://www4.tomshardware.com/consumer/20030509/i950-02.html" target="_new">http://www4.tomshardware.com/consumer/20030509/i950-02.html</A>


Comments in the article suggested that the Lexmark prints were not as vivid and tended to be a bit yellow. While I agree with the lack of vividness, I very much disagree with the yellow comment. Compared to the original, almost every printer in the category had too much red in the picture (one of my concerns). The Lexmark only seemed yellow in comparison to the other printouts (to my eyes). Also, both the X5150 and the deskjet5550 looked very grainy (the other concern).

Now for the questions. I know the photos are blown up to 3x, but the dots seemed quite large. How visible are they to the naked eye, in your opinion? Second, does the PSC 2210 normally leave that much of a red tint to its pictures and how vivid are the pictures to your eyes? Most of Lexmark's printers don't have enough vividness making their colors seem a little gray.

Pain is the realization of your own weakness.

 

[M39shadow]

I haven't really noticed any color variations. It tends to reproduce colors pretty loyal like.

As far as grainy, haven't really seen it unless I print in Normal or lower mode. Kinda also depends on the original. Low quality original means low quality print. I scanned a 1 inch by 1 1/2 inch preview image I got from my daughters school pictures @ 600 dpi a while back and then blew it up to fill 4 x 6 photo paper. It printed really well. The only problems I saw in the print were because I saved it as a .jpg and there were some artifacts because I didn't use a high quality .jpg setting.

The only thing I wish the 2200 had is a sheet feeder. Since I don't fax much it isn't much of an issue.

 

[Bahumut]

Thanks for all the info.
I'm going with the 2200.
Some other people I've talked to gave me similar opinions of the 2200 quality.
I saw some new prints from the X5150 and they were quite yellow (as opposed to the last ones that were only very slightly yellow).

Pain is the realization of your own weakness.