> Laser printers, at least in my experience, suck for photos.
They do... Though if your use case is only photos, look at a completely different technology.
For a number of years, for printing photos I used an Olympus dyesub printer - it was a P-400. It prints an 8x10 (and you had best use the 8x10... or make 4x 4x5s). The problem was that it cost about $3/page to do that print.
I'm not sure about the current lineups and price points. Looking around, there's a Kodak one for $130 for the printer that appears to be at $0.50/4x6.
Now days, for printing photos - for those that I want printed, I go to smugmug or similar.
When you get down to it, I haven't been pleased by the photo printing quality of any of the other technologies.
They do... Though if your use case is only photos, look at a completely different technology.
For a number of years, for printing photos I used an Olympus dyesub printer - it was a P-400. It prints an 8x10 (and you had best use the 8x10... or make 4x 4x5s). The problem was that it cost about $3/page to do that print.
I'm not sure about the current lineups and price points. Looking around, there's a Kodak one for $130 for the printer that appears to be at $0.50/4x6.
Now days, for printing photos - for those that I want printed, I go to smugmug or similar.
When you get down to it, I haven't been pleased by the photo printing quality of any of the other technologies.