Canon Digital Press

[Digital Man]

I am looking at joining Canon as a Print Market Specialist focusing on digital presses for commercial print applications. I would like to pose some questions for your serous feedback. What are your impressions of Canon products, quality and service? I also would like to know your impressions of the new Canon digital presses and if Canon would be a consideration for your business as it appears they are making some serious inroads. I have been in the industry for a long time and this is not an out of college kid! Thank you all for your time and consideration.

Edited by: Digital Man on Dec 8, 2007 8:48 PM

[Craig]

After my 5th Canon color machine,a CLC4000 I will NEVER buy another Canon product as long as I live! After 2 years of battling Canon I finally gave in and had Xerox buy out the lease and now own a DocuColor 8000AP.

The only answerer Canon had to my CLC problems was to buy an ImagePress... NOT! The CLC 4000 - 5100 was suppose to be their "flagship" but after the ImagePress was released it is now the red-headed stepchild!

If I had the choice to work for Canon or bag groceries... I'd be asking if you want paper or plastic!

[Press Guy]

I am quite familiar with both Canon and Xerox. Both companies make some good products but like any company not every product is a winner. I will have to disagree with you with your oppinion on the imagePRESS. Compared to the 8000AP the imagePRESS is a better machine in both quality and reliability. The 8000 AP is old Xerox technology that is still utilizing fuser oil to adhere toner to the paper. When you look at the iGen or DC 260 these products do not utilize fuser oil and offer a better quality output. Xerox' flagship iGen uses a wax based toner not fuser oil ? Unfortunately you have purchased 5 year old technology.

[Craig]

If you would READ a post you would have READ that I never gave an opinion on the ImagePress.... Just Canon for their lack of SUPPORT with their CURRENT machine. At the time of my problems the ImagePress was just released and had it own issues. I think Canon did a fine job of purchasing a DC8000 and reverse engineering it. If you open the two machines up they are almost identical with the exception of 180 degrees with the paper paths. DC8000AP technology may be 5 years old but it is backed up with millions of prints and thousands of installations and second to none service and support.

Better output from machines that don't use fuser oil is just a blanket statement. I have a Canon IRC3200 that doesn't use fuser oil and the prints look like crap next to the 2400x2400 dpi output from the DC8000AP.

As for reliability how would you know unless you own both of them? Do you even own anything, or are you just a "user" ?

[John Baldwin]

I own and Imagepress. It does have reliability issues. Ikon is giving us good support though. The tech rep comes in twice a week for preventative maintenance and the machine is very productive. The product we are able to provide our clients is so much better than what we could provide from a Xerox machine. It's worth the preventative time.

[Dave Lambert]

Still happy with our C7000 from Canon. As for Canon Service, they've only been called 3 times since our install in mid April, and those 3 calls were handled to our satisfaction. We have run just over 400k on it so far. But more important, our clients love the quality and we are constantly up against Xerox iGen's. Clients find the color quality from the Canon is much better than the iGen's. What I've heard most is that the color produced "matches" the PDF's they see on their screens and the the color quality is constant through the whole run. I also hear "no streaks" as well.

[Craig]

Again I will say I liked the ImagePress, I just don't care for Canon. One thing that makes me curious though, everyone talks about streaks, I have 500,000 on my 8000AP all 12x18 coated and uncoated up to 300gsm and I have yet to see streaks. Now on my old CLC4000 it was a different story, they were replacing fuser rollers every week. Seems to me that the streaking is mainly a low end machine problem, once you move up to the production level I have yet to see it.

[Matt151]

Did you really just compare an iRC3200 to a Docucolor 8000AP? They are completely different machines not even in the same category! The 3200 is a business color machine, not a graphics machine, of course the Docucolor's quality is better.

Edited by: Matt151 on Jun 27, 2008 3:55 PM

[Craig]

If you are referring to my post about machines that don't use fuser oil then no, it wasn't a comparison it was a contrast statement. I own both machines and am well aware of their capabilities. I was pointing out the inaccurate thought behind the statement, that because it doesn't use fuser oil it is automatically a better press.

I will say it again, the ImagePress is a great machine, I just am not comfortable with Canon USA's lack of support when everything turns to crap. They have proven their lack of support over 3 years with my CLC4000 (Which at the time was their "Flagship" production copier much like the ImagePress line) when it was costing my dealer $0.18 per click (before toner/developer/fuser oil) to keep it running when I was paying $0.085 per click for maintenance.

Now with the ImagePress in the hands of Kodak, that's a completely different story. I believe Kodak will supply the support Canon lacks. Kodak, like Xerox understands what the production environment is and what is required for ME to make money too, not just Canon or the Dealer. Canon just doesn't have a grasp on the production market, the office market they do, but not production.

[ArizonaSlim]

Hey Chris,

You need to get your FACTS straight. The Canon imagepress is not a reversed engineered version of the DC8000! The imagepress uses a 5.5 micron toner (20% smaller than X), a belt fusing system (like iGen) that automatically matches the gloss of the image to the gloss of the paper, and two fusers, vs one in the Xerox.

The AP model claims to maintain the same speed on all weights, but you better look close at the customer expectation document where Xerox admits that max quality may not be acheived in AP mode. Imagepress trays are ALL vacuum fed, and the paper is registered with a side guide and pull guide system LIKE A REAL PRESS.

Oh yeh... 2400 x 2400, Xerox needs to get over it! They rez-up the image to 2400 dpi, and use this to calculate a halftone, then they use a 600 dpi laser to image the halftone... THAT IS NOT 2400 X 2400 PRINTING! imagepress RIPs at 1200 dpi and prints at true optical 1200 dpi creating a photographic level output at around a 170 line screen. Until Xerox gets their next generation out, Docucolor is the past and imagepress is the future!!!!