Canon C9075

[StrikTenn913]

Hi Geoman - I was referring to the Ricoh PRO C900.

[jotterpinky]

We made a purchase of two light production color printers recently. We tried the KM6501 on a demo and also a Xerox 700. We liked the X700, colors really popped and it seems to print nice smooth solids with very little roller marking / streaking seen on our Xerox 250 (maybe give it time!) However we ended up purchasing a Canon 9065 due to cost contraints with the GX RIP. We were unable to try this on a demo but thought the samples and prints looked promising. To date after 4 months of struggle we are not happy with several things on this machine. To balance my comments we also purchased a Xerox 700 shortly afterwards and are running the two head to head.

1. Registration on the Canon 9065 is no-where near the registration on the Xerox 700. The tech has been able to dial it in to a tolerable amount of shift on front to back and even sheet to sheet variances but it doesn't hold a candle to the Xerox. It reminds me of the registration on our older Xerox 250 machine...maybe slightly worse.

2. The color off the Canon seems to carry shift towards the yellow end of the spectrum (the Xerox seems to have a more magenta shift). Our main problem with the color on the Canon is that we use 10-15 prints to get the color where we want (yes we calibrate at least twice a day on both machines). 90% of the prints off the Xerox look great the first print. By the way we have both RIPs set to use the same color profiles (Gracol 7 coated) and all the same options are checked...only difference is the output profile, it being different for both machines.

3. Canon is much slower on coated stock...we can finish a run of 12x18 80# cover 4/4 in 2/3 the time on our Xerox 700 (yes I realize it's rated slightly faster 65 vs 70 ppm)

4. We have had the Canon tech in nearly every other day since we bought it...upgrading software, fixing feeding in the oversize hi-cap drawers, playing with the color, clearing error codes etc. The Xerox technician has been in once in 2 months (we are putting about 60,000 impressions on each machine a month...less on the Canon since it's constantly down). We get great looking prints on the Xerox consistently and our customers have gotten into a habit of asking to have their jobs run on it instead of the other machine. We are now advising our employees to not start conversations that sound like.."if you can wait about 15 minutes I'll run another proof for you on our better machine it usually looks better"...we are seriously considering getting rid of the Canon and purchasing another 700.

5. This all being said I must admit that I prefer the user interface on the Canon above that of the Xerox. The scanning is more intuitive and flexible, the interface more friendly but probably only because I've used their black and white and older color equipment for ages.

Given everything I've seen between the two machines I would definitely recommend the Xerox 700 over the Canon...despite the additional cost we paid for the Xerox. I realize that this may sound like a pitch for the Xerox but is only my own personal experience using both pieces of equipment in a day to day print for pay environment. I would even recommend the KM6501 over the Canon 9065 based upon our three week demo we had with the KM. We had far less trouble in that three weeks that we've had in a week with the Canon.

The thing is I would prefer to keep a good relationship with our Canon dealer since we have a number of B&W engines we lease from them as well as some smaller Ricoh color equipment. However my business is suffering from this poorly made printer...I just wish Canon would clean up their act and not release these things until they are truly ready for prime-time.

[TorontoPrint]

Maybe you can provide some insight on the issues I am having. I really want to love this machine, but I'm just not there yet. I've tried the hammermill color copy, and I just don't get them same results as with a coated sheet.

The most successful one i've tried so far is Futura Dull. It does feed consistently in both text weight and cover weight through drawers 3 and 4. It will not feed consistently from any of the pod deck drawers though. I will need it to feed 100# cover at some point, but haven't had the need to yet.

I find this odd since the pod deck is supposed to be air assisted and provides a straighter paper path than drawers three and four. We do have the proper gsm set for the paper and tried adjusting the fan level. Nothing seems to work.

Here is a list of the stock I've tried so far:
Unisource U-Digital velvet cover
Titan Dull cover
Endurance Dull cover
Futura Dull cover
Opus Dull cover

I am willing to use any of these, but none of them will feed through the pod deck. I can get text weight to run, but not cover. Can you make a recommendation on a dull cover stock? Are any of your customers having the same issue?

I don't think I am being unreasonable to ask for a paper to feed consistently that it is specified to run.

Thanks for your feedback.

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you, I hadn't checked into the forum for quite some time. My customers have not had any of the POD Deck issues you are having. Not sure what the discrepancy is. I do have a couple of questions for you, and an answer on your cover stock.

-Have the techs done a proper drawer alignment on your POD?
-Is it Canon Direct (CBS in the US), or a Dealer doing your service)?
-What are your service guarantees with regards to performance?
-Were you provided with a Customer Expectation setting Document (CED). Are the stocks you're running within the guidelines depicted in the CED? If so I would say you had a pretty good case for having your POD Deck replaced.

Try this stock:
Hammermill 100lb Dull Cover Stock order#3320-2

______________________________________________
The views expressed here are my own and do not reflect those of Canon Canada Inc, or Canon USA