|
Canon Glossy 4 x 6 Inch Photo Paper Plus 50 Sheets (7980A012) | 
 enlarge
| Brand: Canon Office Products
Category: Office Product
List Price: $14.99
Buy New: $2.74
You Save: $12.25 (82%)
New (73) Used (2) from $2.00
Rating:  49 reviews
Sales Rank: 420
Color: White
Number Of Items: 50
Batteries Included: No
Size: 4x6
Shipping Weight (lbs): 2
Dimensions (in): 0.6 x 4.3 x 7.4
MPN: 7980A012
Model: 7980A012
UPC: 013803021172
EAN: 0013803021172
ASIN: B0000721Z4
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Condition: BRAND NEW and GENUINE CANON, in ORIGINAL CANON FACTORY-SEALED BOX. Brand New, Never Opened! We ship SAME BUSINESS DAY with FREE DELIVERY TRACKING. Expedited ships 2-DAY. We guarantee rated condition.
| |
| Features:
| • | For Canon printers that accept 4-by-6-inch paper | | • | Prints bordered or borderless photos | | • | Glossy finish | | • | 50 sheets | | • | 90-day warranty |
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Introducing CANON's newest and heaviest photo-lab quality borderless glossy paper! Cherish your photos with one of the finest papers available! 50 sheets per package Partial list of compatible printers - CANON S9000, i950, S830D, S530D, i70, i470D
Amazon.com Product Description
With your Canon digital photo printer, digital camera, and this gorgeous paper, you may never have to use traditional photo processing again. Designed to work with any Canon printer that accepts 4-by-6-inch paper, these borderless sheets look and feel remarkably like the paper used by professional labs--or maybe even a little better. With technical details like a 92 ISO brightness, 10.5 mil thickness, and 17.91 lb. media weight, you can be sure that your prints will show off rich contrast and realistic skin tones, and will never ripple or curl around the edges. Now you can have snap photos that are worthy of framing. Fifty sheets are included in each packet. The manufacturer provides a 90-day warranty against defect.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 44 more reviews...
 Works March 27, 2008
J. Paul Fontana (PA, USA)
It works and looks great. I can't tell you how well it ages, but just a week later all the photos still look excellent.
Well worth the money December 18, 2007
Julie (Burke, VA)
Tired of paying the higher prices associated with Canon brand photo paper (versus any other brand of photo paper), I decided to do a little quality comparison right at home. I bought some less expensive Microsoft photo paper that was also termed "high gloss" photo paper (by the way, you'll disover that there is clearly no industry standard of "high gloss" - it seems anything can be branded as high gloss no matter what the quality). I decided to try to print out a low-resolution photo on each type of photo paper and compare them both. For starters, my Canon printer would not even let me choose the option of low resolution when I selected any other type of photo paper aside from Canon. So I had to settle for printing a medium-resolution photo on the Microsoft paper and comparing it to the low-resolution photo printed on the Canon high gloss. AMAZING what a difference there was - the Canon paper beat out the Microsoft paper by far, even with low resolution. Furthermore, even when I swtiched to high resolution for the Microsoft paper, there was no comparison to the low resolution Canon paper. Canon really knows how to make the best photo paper - pay the price, it's well worth it.
Nice... November 28, 2007
M.O.B. (USA)
Nice photo paper for everyday use... Can not find any problems with... But my favorite is Ilford "Gallerie" series...
Good for Canon printer August 15, 2007
eugef (USA)
This paper works great with Canon printer. Unfortunately this is the ONLY paper that works great with a canon printer. Any other paper I tried produce terrible result. So, basically if you own Canon printer you stuck with this paper, which can be a little less expensive. I gave 4 stars because the price is a bit high.
works great April 12, 2007
P. M. Keating (Akron, OH USA)
Works great - I think it might be worth paying extra for compared to generics.
|
|
|
| |
