Home > Consumer Reviews > Canon Pixma MP800 Premium All in One Photo Lab with 3.5" LCD Viewer

Canon Pixma MP800 Premium All in One Photo Lab with 3.5" LCD Viewer

Average Customer Rating
(4.5 out of 5)

Amazon Customer Reviews

Most Helpful First | Newest First | + Share
2 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

A good buy

(5 out of 5) by Eric Mcnulty on Nov 5, 2006 (Scotland)
The MP800 arrived on 26th October very easy to setup but over the weekend noticed a problem with printing photos lines and smudging on black parts of photo. I emailed Amazon and received a reply the next morning asking if I wanted a refund or a replacment machine. I liked the rest of the features and asked for a replacement to be shipped which arrived next day and is working ok. The quality of the photo's prints now as good as any ive seen and also like the printing software supplied as have used with my previous Canon i865 printer. Even with the photo printing problems I had I would recomend this machine to anyone wanting a good alround machine and also thank Amazon for thier excellant service.

Time tested

(5 out of 5) by C. I. Rowley on Feb 1, 2009 (Cornwall)
I bought this item a couple of years ago now so have had time to discover any problems. I haven't found any.
It cost a lot more then than now but I don't regret buying it and would go for the same again. It does everything I need it too and the ability to deal with photo negatives is great.
A good buy.

Fine performance - shame about the cost of the cartirdges

(2 out of 5) by R. Duncan on Jan 9, 2008 (Scotland)
The recent OFT report into the scandal that is the UK printer ink cartridge industry could have been based on this product. I've had no trouble with the quality of the printing or the multi function performance, but the remarkably short life of the cartridges is matched only by the remarkably high price of the replacements. The chips attached to the cartridges make it all but impossible to use the products of other ink suppliers. The price seemed good when I bought this product, but when the exceptionally high running costs are taken into account it is poor value for money.