HP Deskjet F2280

Decent photo printing from a cheap multifunction

  • Review
  • Specs
  • Images
  • User Reviews
  • Buy Now
HP Deskjet F2280
  • HP Deskjet F2280
  • HP Deskjet F2280
  • HP Deskjet F2280

Pros

  • Good photo printing quality, front paper tray

Cons

  • Slow, expensive to run, poor text printing quality

Bottom Line

Even if you're looking for a cheap-as-chips multifunction, the F2280 isn't necessarily a compelling choice. It's slow and noisy, and text quality isn't that great. However, if you need a cheap solution for printing the odd photo then this unit does the trick.

Would you buy this?

HP's new entry-level multifunction comes with a bargain-bin price tag. For all the disappointment we felt with Lexmark's X2650, a side-by-side comparison with this multifunction shows the Lexmark coming out on top in speed and quality. The F2280 is cheaper to run, but if quality is a key consideration then it's best to pass on this printer.

Build quality is generally an afterthought when it comes to sub-$100 multifunctions, and the F2280 is no exception. The unit's scanner cover isn't fixed to the device and it is easily removed; we can't find any real use for this feature and it is sure to lead to a lost scanner cover in the presence of kids. The device's control panel has a bevy of LEDs that display printer status and copy settings, something that wouldn't have gone astray on Lexmark's X2650. We also appreciate the printer's use of a front paper tray rather than a rear one; this helps minimise the unit's footprint.

While the F2280 produces a lot of noise, it lacks speed. Standard text documents printed at an average 13.3 pages per minute in draft quality, slowing markedly to 4ppm in normal quality. Graphical documents with text highlights are slower again: draft quality documents average a speed of 7.7ppm and standard quality documents print at 2ppm. The X2650 clearly outshone the F2280 in photo printing speeds, with the HP printing taking 1min 30sec to print a standard 4x6in photo.

The F2280's consumables are fairly expensive: it runs at an average of 31.23c per page. While this is a marked improvement on the X2650, it remains incredibly expensive to run on a daily basis.

Quality is average for a printer at this price point, but the unit tends to overuse ink. The F2280 incorporates a new ink technology dubbed "dual drop volume", which is supposed to deliver laser-quality text and smoother colour transition. We noticed the latter, but it seems the laser quality aspect has gone astray. Text characters are clean and tidy, but are noticeably bolder than those from the X2650. While this doesn't affect readability so much, it seems that dual drop volume technology leads to an overuse of ink, making pages prone to smudging. Colours are much more accurate than blacks, with no real evidence of exaggeration to the same degree as text.

We were impressed with the F2280's photo printing. Blacks are remarkably well defined and reds are accurate, delivering realistic flesh tones. Whereas photos printed from the X2650 were riddled with vertical banding, photos from the F2280 were clear with no abnormalities. Although better print quality can be obtained from more expensive printers, the F2280's ability to produce reasonable quality photos at such a low price places it ahead of the X2650 in at least one respect.

Scan quality is adequate, but not the most accurate we've seen. Colours are often under-saturated and images are overly light, which affects scan quality in lighter images. Nevertheless, text is reasonably well reproduced.

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Be the first to comment.

Post new comment

Users posting comments agree to the Good Gear Guide comments policy.

Login or register to link comments to your user profile, or you may also post a comment without being logged in.

Most Popular Reviews

Follow Us

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Shopping.com

Latest News Articles

Resources

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?