Portable small printers are a dime a dozen on the market now, compared to a few years ago. The HP Sprocket printer is one of the most popular printers on the market. It’s a tiny and portable printer that adds some excitement to the normally tedious task of printing images. The Fujifilm Instax Link Wide is another new addition to the collection. This is one of the first instant printers to print wide-format images, and it certainly adds to the fun.
Because of this unique function, the Instax Link Wide printer is significantly more costly. That begs the issue of whether the Instax Link Wide is superior than the HP Sprocket 200. Or are the Instax printer’s added functions worth the extra money?
That’s exactly what we’ll discover today as we compare the HP Sprocket 200 against the Fujifilm Instax Link Wide in this post. Let’s get started, shall we, as this is going to be a long post?
Best Instant Photo Printers on the Market
CONNECTIVITY AND DESIGN
The Fujifilm Instax Link Wide and the HP Sprocket 200 are both small and portable printers. When comparing the two, the HP sprocket 200 takes the situation very seriously. It is approximately 4.6 x 3.1 x 1 inch in size and weighs 6.1 ounces. What’s the best part? Simply tuck it inside your trouser pockets (or purse).
It also comes with a rather contemporary design that includes rounded corners and curved edges. The stylish pattern on top adds even more gloss to the outfit.
It’s a ZINK printer, and once it’s linked to your phone’s Bluetooth, it’ll start printing right away.
The HP Sprocket 200 is one of the first tiny printers to use Bluetooth 5.0, which is a significant advantage. You’re able to establish a reliable connection. You now have the option of connecting up to three phones to the printer at once. Some users, however, have claimed that this functionality does not function as intended. Printing your images first and then switching to a new phone is the easiest way to go about it.
The Instax Link Wide is designed in a pretty aggressive manner by Fujifilm. This printer has a large body because it produces larger prints than its competitors. For the record, it’s 1.3 x 5.5 x 5.0 inches in size. It’s also about twice as heavy as the Sprocket 200, weighing in at 12 ounces.
HP Sprocket 200 5 versus Fujifilm Instax Link Wide
However, because to its large size, it is not a pocket-friendly device. To transport it, you’d need a tiny tote bag or a somewhat larger handbag.
It’s a Bluetooth 4.2 LE printer, to be precise. It’s from a previous generation, but it gets the job done and can maintain a secure connection between the phone and the laptop.
Also Read: Review of the MacBook Pro 2021 (16-inch): Incredible power
BATTERY
One of the most important components of a wireless device, such as a portable printer, is the battery. And if you’ve ever owned a portable printer, you’re probably aware that they’re not recognised for their long battery life.
On paper, the HP printer can print around 10 times on a single battery. It is powered by a tiny rechargeable battery with a capacity of 550mAh. The Sprocket 200, on the other hand, can print while attached to a power source. So you know what to do if you want to print a large number of images at once.
On the other hand, the Instax Link Wide gets you around 100 prints on a single charge. It is an official number. The odds are high that the actual number will be slightly less. The folks at the PC Mag tested this little printer and found the charge depleting to 60% after just 10 prints.
IN-APP FEATURES
In-app features are important for a portable printer, especially if you plan to use it on the move and give it to kids. After all, you wouldn’t want to print plain photos while out on a picnic or vacation. That’s the job of a dedicated photo printer if you ask us.
The HP Sprocket 200, on the other hand, does not let you down. For the time being, you may decorate your photographs with frames, borders, and stickers. You can also use the app to connect it to your social media accounts and print your Instagram photographs. That’s a great idea.
In addition to printing basic prints, the Fujifilm Instax Link Wide allows you to make collages, add frames, and overlay clip art on top of your images. You may also use a pre-made Sepia or Monochrome tone if you want to spice things up.
More significantly, it has a fantastic library of birthday card and party templates. These characteristics make it suitable for both youngsters and adults. After all, having a little fun isn’t always a bad thing.
PICTURE QUALITY
Let’s talk about the elephant in the room now. If the final outputs are dark or off-color, no printer is worth its money. When it comes to printing photographs, the HP Sprocket 200 employs ZINK technology. ZINK is an inkless printing process that prints images without the need of toners or ink.
The photos are developed only via the application of heat. And, to be honest, the outcomes aren’t horrible. These picture sheets are also smudge-proof and waterproof. The photographs are good and attractive, however they are a touch darker and lack crispness.
Coming to the printing cost, a 50-pack ZINK photo paper costs around $24, while a 20-pack Instax Wide film costs around $20.
The advantage of this approach is that the photographs are supplied swiftly.
In comparison to the HP printer, the Instax printer is a little slower due to the usage of film. A single shot might take up to 30 seconds to print and 20 seconds to develop.
Regardless, the Instax printer produces amazing output. The colours are true to life, and the clarity is razor-sharp. The photographs are around 62 mm x 99 mm in size, compared to 50 x 76 mm for the Sprocket.
VERDICT: FUJIFILM INSTAX MINI LINK WIDE
So, how do you choose a printer? We recommend the Instax printer if you don’t mind spending a few dollars to get the greatest quality shot (from a portable printer). Not only are the photographs larger, but they also have superb colour and detail.
The HP Sprocket, on the other hand, is a good choice if you want a small printer for casual use. The printer is tiny and compact, and the cost per film is lower. However, there is a cost to all of this, and that cost is the image quality.