Canon - SELPHY CP760

I have a weird obsession with buying Canon Selphys when I find them in thrift stores. I now have six in total, ranging from a CP400 (which honestly holds up really well. Prints good, is really solidly made with decent materials, and isn't bloated with too many features), to a pair of semi-working CP760s, two CP1200s (one of which was the first one I bought, brand new, full price, and another bought for $30 with a hardcase and extra paper/cassettes), to my best find which was a CP900 (which has all the features of the 1200s, just without a battery slot) for *three dollars*. Still reeling from that last one. And it works perfectly. I don't think they're perfect machines; the cassettes seem kinda wasteful, and the picture quality isn't the absolute best. But they're incredibly useful and fun, especially the portable ones. I take one to conventions with me to make digital art badges, and sometimes print off physical photos for people at as keepsakes.

Some of the old point and shoots did that, but you might need old cables, old printers, etc. Could be even more of a technical nightmare than use current tech. Some fairly recent Canons can still connect via USB to a Selphy printer I think via PictBridge. Instead, i'd look for a current printer that can work from an SD card. Not sure why that's any different than using USB, and you'll have to have some sort of storage IN the camera anyway. The Selphy printers can print from inserted SD cards, maybe others. If you want fast, that might be it. Or maybe try Instax if you can live with their small prints and low resolution.

Selphy It is dye-sub, which prints thermal from ribbon dye cartridges. It's doesn't have the best gamut or color accuracy, but inkjet 'casually' is a recipe for a nightmare of dealing with clogged nozzles every time you go to print until you just want to chuck it in a dumpster.

I'm a clueless German; we have no Walgreens here. Please specify your current workflow and needs. Printing at home is usually far(!) from cost efficient. If I need prints, just in general, I usually wire them to CEWE, for picking them up at my local drug store, after a promised week, to which I can walk, while the rented washing machine in my attic is running. I can also buy some groceries on that trip, so I really have zero extra cost for shipping or commuting. For SRA3 laser prints I'd rely on work. They have two Minolta lasers. I do *own* a Canon Selphy. I haven't unboxed it yet. Imagined use case: To need a postcard (-x) sized color print *NOW(!)*. Dyesubs are great at sitting around unused, while inkjets reguire power and regular flushing routines, that might break my neck over time. - Speed aside the printer offers no benefits and is at least 3x as expensive to operate.

I own one but I haven't even unboxed it. A Selphy is a wonderful machine to once in a blue moon or like every week? print an entire postcard. Dye sub tech is excellent for sitting around and doing nothing; i.e you 'll go through some hassle to revive a fountain pen, you used a year ago, but your Selphy will just fire up. Print quality seems decent and the results aren't overly sensitive / quite abusable. But: Prints *are* expensive. If you are a penny pincher, with all the time in the world: Order from DM. If you are an artist: Print bigger! IMHO Selpys are intended to serve as a Polaroid substitute; bring yours somewhere, give people pictures, right in the spot. (You need to buy an extra battery, to print in the field). A wealthy friend of mine uses his Selphy at home. Mine is intended to serve in a pinch.

How portable do you mean or want? - 30 years ago i jobbed for a company that hauled roll fed inkjet plotters to architects. We were two on the van and the plotters quite light (compared to a 4c Heidelberg of at least 2.8t). An apparently capable A4 desktop color laser weighs just 35kg; i.e. I could move it on my own (but have no clue how results compare to the bigger ones, doing photo books and calendars at work). Just stressing: A big inkjet can deliver awesome quality these days and color lasers are cost efficient. Myself I bought a Canon Selphy dyesub, doing postcards (sadly in 3/0) or smaller. - I'd rather have a 3/1, since my handwriting sucks, but... Operating cost will be comparably horrible, but it can sit around free of cost, unlike inkjets, that need regular flushing routines and aren't cheap to operate either Other niggles: Postcards are too tiny Some users reported issues with dust inside their machines. Its more or less "a Polaroid substitute toy" but a way to produce photos at home or elsewhere.

Canon Selphy forever. I spent years researching mini-printers. If you want your photos to last and be of the best quality for home prints, get a Selphy.

I was gifted a canon selphy last week. Its not bad. I'd compare it to the old school polaroid printouts, but better quality. Definitely would use it to smash out a quick edit and print to give away on the spot as a promo photo, But not the kind I'd frame and put on the wall. And thanks to the other commenter about the batteries, I'll look into those too.

Also love my Canon Selphy!! The photo quality matters to me since I love looking back and rediscovering memories!

I wouldn't recommend any zink printers if the color accuracy/quality is important to you. They are definitely the easiest and most convenient. It's very simple to use and the sheets are small, good for small photos to put into a journal. But, the colors are gonna be off. The selphy is probably what you're looking for but I agree it's pricy. The most cost effective option is to just print your images in bulk ofc, but since you didn't want to do that, I'd lean towards the selphy.

I've owned Canon, Kodak, and HP and the Canon is by far the best of all of them. I have the Canon and the Selphy and love them both.

You're asking about price per print, *including* the amortized cost of the printer. In the long run, ink and paper costs always dominate. Short term however, the price of the printer dominates. A more expensive printer, such as the Epson ET8550, will have very good long term cost, but the initial investment is steep. A less expensive printer, such as a Canon SELPHY, will have a modest initial price, but price per picture adds up much faster. The least expensive printer is Walgreen's, with no up-front cost, but high ongoing cost. A second consideration is quality. The more expensive the printer, the higher the print quality. The ET8550 will outperform Walgreens, producing richer colors and more detail. A professional printer such as the Canon Pro 1200, will be even better. The SELPHY does not match Walgreens. And then there's effort. Walgreens takes your JPEGs and prints them. SELPHY does, too. But a dedicated printer will require some fiddling with a computer to get good results. On the flip side, you get to play with various paper types and sizes. But make no mistake, this is extra effort. Personally, I went with a Canon Pro 200, which is roughly equivalent to the Epson ET8550, but cheaper to buy and more expensive to operate. It's all a matter of how much do you intend to print. I also have a much cheaper Epson XP8500, which prints better photos than the SELPHY, for less money, but can't match the Pro 200. I also have a SELPHY, which is nice for what it is, but can't match Walgreen. And I have an INSTAX printer, which fits in my pocket and prints adorable little polaroids. But quality can't match even the SELPHY. Depending on your needs, all of the mentioned printers are a good purchase. In your case, I'd probably recommend the Epson XP8800 as a cheap, good quality photo printer. You'll be able to buy six full ink replacements before you'll reach the cost of the ET8550, which should take several years. If you'd like to splurge, the ET8550 is definitely the better printer, with lower ink costs. And keep in mind that ink is only one part of the running costs. It's easy to get swept up in the marketing that an ecotank printer makes printing "free". But that's ignoring paper costs, which in my experience dominate printing costs in the long run. First party paper is reliable and good, but offers only limited variations. Third party paper requires matching printer profiles, which can be hard to come by for non-professional printers such as the XP8800 (but some paper manufacturers (Photospeed) profile for free, and there are cheap services for creating bespoke profiles).