Pixma hardly packs a punch (Canon Pixma MP150)

Member Name: jazzsue58

Product:	Canon Pixma MP150
Date:	03/12/08 (34 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Ease of usage. British company.

Disadvantages: Expensive cartridges. Flimsy design means it breaks down after minimal use.

I am afraid my experience of this printer has been a very negative experience, reinforced by the fact that the machine I'm about to write about is the third I've had in under a year!

Prior to this purchase, I owned an HP all-in-one printer. It was so baffling to use - and occupied so much of my very limited memory space - that I quickly sold it on. I had no particular brand in mind for a replacement, and chose Canon simply because they were the sole manufacturer stocked by Cartridge World (as then was) who had a branch on my doorstep. The fact that I also live a stone's throw from the Canon head office, and used to date one of their security guards, had nothing to do with it. No, really.

I have to say, at this juncture, that my previous experience of Canon had not been favourable - Steve Jenkins notwithstanding. The last printer I had from them lasted for less than a year, after which the flimsy plastic belt and roller refused to work. I put this down to the fact the usage it was getting was far beyond that for which it was designed, and that buying a more expensive design would get me a more robust product. I was wrong.

I purchased my Pixma 150 for £55, on special offer from its usual price of £79.99 (or so I was told.) The salesman assured me it was a premium product at a budget price, and that he'd never had one returned to him. I am not surprised at this. Three weeks after I first used it, I began experiencing the familiar problem I'd had with my old, basic machine - the roller turning ineffectually without the paper feeding through. But this had only happened with my original Pixma after I'd printed off the equivalent of a 500 page novel with it, and got through countless reams of paper and refilled ink cartridges. With usage like that, it was to be expected that a basic, low usage machine would soon give up the ghost. But my Pixma 150 was a home office product, designed for moderately heavy use but still on the same cartridge and paper I was given when I bought the thing!

I quickly returned it to the shop, expecting a full refund. Instead, I was told there was a two week maximum for returning the merchandise, after which I was expected to deal with Canon direct! Two weeks, on a home printing product; how the hell could it have got a full 'road test' in that time? Some people wouldn't even have removed it from the packaging by then! Consumer Direct said this was wrong - but the store manager wouldn't budge. (Big tip: NEVER deal with a small provider unless they are mentioned by name in the guarantee period. Cartridge World have since gone out of business - no surprises there.)

Seething, but sans working printer, I had no option but to contact the repair centre recommended by Canon - Electrotec. They sent me a return address label and instructions on how to use it. Now came the next shock - postage was payable by the customer, at courier rates! Even though the product was sold plainly not fit for purpose, and had broken down less than 1 month into its 2 year guarantee, I was expected to fund its repair costs!!! (I don't normally write in multiple exclamation marks. Normally, I don't have to.)

Eventually, I reached a deal with Cartridge World, and sent it off at their own courier rates. (£7.95 instead of £22+) Electrotec didn't waste time trying to fix the fault - instead, they sent me a new printer practically by return of post. Problem solved, I thought. Except it wasn't.

Three weeks and one ream of paper later, the same thing happened again. This time, though, I dealt directly with Electrotec, who were extremely efficient. They didn't seem at all surprised when they told me that, under the manufacturer's advice, I was to return the printer to Cartridge World and pick out another brand new one. "Yeah," the engineer said. "Canon, innit? We get a lot of those." Remembering the recent Canon HQ refit, I suggested maybe it was the way I was using the printer; was there was anything I could do to stop it happening again? "Yeah," he replied. "Have you thought about switching to Lexmark?"

This time, the machine lasted for almost 6 months before - yep, you've guessed it - breaking down again. I had got through exactly one colour and two mono cartridges, and one and a half reams of paper, since my very first purchase three exchanges back. It occurred to me that, even when it was working, the paper feed had never been anything less than erratic. (The first time I went for a replacement cartridge, I realised this was A Good Thing. Despite their printer stockist being a confirmed cartridge refilling agent it turned out my Canon cartridges, alone among all the brands, are non-refillable. What is more, you can't buy 'recons' either. I was forced to buy brand new MP150 cartridges direct from Canon, at a stonking £14.99 each! If I used anything else, they wouldn't work - that was their spiel, anyway.)

Having decided an ebay Lexmark as my next choice of action, I removed my printer for disposal to the local recycling centre, via a scathing consumer report direct to the TSO. There was a worrying rattle coming from deep inside, so I took the opportunity to examine the roller more closely. It was exactly the same as my old one; if anything, even more insubstantial. Despite their claim of 'robust use' Canon have seen fit to build their printers with the cheapest, flimsiest plastics available. The rattling was part of the belt drive - also plastic - which had snapped off during normal use. (The paper holder, being equally flimsy, had snapped in two the first time I extended it) Had the machine been dropped in transit, even onto soft carpet, it would have disintegrated on impact.

Yes, my Pixma was easy to navigate, had loads of special features to download, and had a fantastic scanner (which is what I now use it for) But all this goes for nothing when you consider the machine is totally inadequate for the job it is meant to do - print off sheets of paper.

I give this just one star - and that's only because Steve Jenkins has a cute bottom.

Suzanne C

(NB "Steve Jenkins" is a pseudonym)

Summary: There are much better three-in-ones out there for the same price.