Canon V700 vs. KM C4070 vs. Ricoh C5400S

U

usagfx

Member
Hello,

This would be our first press. So far, the following is in our budget: Canon V700, KM C4070 or Ricoh C5400S

Would appreciate any advice based on the follow needs:

Quality:
- Ultra high accuracy for registration front/back
- Ultra high print resolution
- Finest possible quality of toner, density and color accuracy
- No photos, only text and vector graphics

Volume:
- Extremely high mix, low volume runs
- Not a job shop, we will use it for design consulting work and we have direct clients
- Volume can range 2000-10,000 sheets per month of 13x19" size

Substrates:
- Wide ranging, anywhere from 70 to 320 gsm
- Textured paper and synthetic papers
- Need to print on envelopes and tabs

Finishing:
- No need, straight output tray

My basic approach is to get the following in the kit:
- Vacuum or Air Assist feeder
- IQ-501 or similar system for inline-quality
- Fiery controller

Solid support in my area for all 3 brands, so its not an issue.

I would appreciate advice for things like quality of print, shine control of toner, registration accuracy, consistency and other quality related aspects such as gamut, darkest black, printing on textured paper, etc.

Thank you so much!
 
usagfx said:
Curious of the reasoning behind your suggestion.
Click to expand...
Not who you are replying to, but I would guess it’s because you have specified “ultra high accuracy registration” and performance on textured stocks. The light production machines you are looking at I guarantee will show their weaknesses with those expectations. The 7200 is as good as I’ve ever experienced on a digital machine for registration (we have a 7210). I came from a KM with the “IQ” module and the Ricoh is leaps better than that system, IMHO.

Textured stocks are not going to be absolutely perfect but there is a lot of settings you can dial in, I only do a handful of textures and have no problems selling it, but again it is not perfect …I recommend a demo on your preferred stocks to set your expectations.
 
kslight said:
Not who you are replying to, but I would guess it’s because you have specified “ultra high accuracy registration” and performance on textured stocks. The light production machines you are looking at I guarantee will show their weaknesses with those expectations. The 7200 is as good as I’ve ever experienced on a digital machine for registration (we have a 7210). I came from a KM with the “IQ” module and the Ricoh is leaps better than that system, IMHO.

Textured stocks are not going to be absolutely perfect but there is a lot of settings you can dial in, I only do a handful of textures and have no problems selling it, but again it is not perfect …I recommend a demo on your preferred stocks to set your expectations.
Click to expand...
Excellent, this is what I was looking for. My consideration for IQ-501 was based on some of the feedback I got from dealers.
 
usagfx said:
Excellent, this is what I was looking for. My consideration for IQ-501 was based on some of the feedback I got from dealers.
Click to expand...
If you decide to go KM you probably need it, but it is IMHO a very flawed design (impossible to actually clean and frustrating / unproductive to use it the way the sales people tell you to…per sheet checking errors out once you have a spec of dust on it..see impossible to clean). The way I think about it is it’s an expensive retrofit to fix poor registration too late in the process, rather than simply engineering the feeding and transport better, IMHO. Ricoh accomplishes this same type of inline scan within the transport right after the fuser, and there is an easily accessible strip of glass the operator can easily wipe off.
 
Shawnd said:
Registration and working on the machine will be much easier with the double doors. That and it is a an actual production machine, not the "lite" production that the 5xxx line is. A used 72xx will outperform a 5xxx anyday.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the context. How would you say Ricoh 72XX compares with Canon V700 or KM C4070? I got rough pricing for a new Ricoh C7500 without the 5th color, based on pricing alone it feels like a different category of machines than V700/C4070.
 
I asked around Printing United 25 about the registration / image quality module pricing for Canon (Sensing Unit), Fuji/Xerox (Smart Monitoring Gate), and Konica Minolta (IQ-501). All are around $20,000 USD extra.
 
We get these kinds of posts quite frequently, and my answer is always the same: Rarely has anyone here used all 3 of the brands or devices in question to give you a truly comparative assessment. The best thing to do is bring your own paper (especially the textured paper) and a few of your more challenging files to their demo rooms and test each one out. This will let you see the quality along with the process for registering the front/back alignment.

For what it's worth, we have 2 color KM devices, both with IQ-501's and the alignment is spot on throughout the entire run. It takes about 2 minutes and 1 sheet of paper to get it in alignment. We also have 3 b/w KM devices where we do the front/back alignment from the glass instead (the scanner where you make copies) and even though it takes a minute or two longer, once it's aligned, it holds perfectly throughout the entire run.
 
jwheeler said:
We get these kinds of posts quite frequently, and my answer is always the same: Rarely has anyone here used all 3 of the brands or devices in question to give you a truly comparative assessment. The best thing to do is bring your own paper (especially the textured paper) and a few of your more challenging files to their demo rooms and test each one out. This will let you see the quality along with the process for registering the front/back alignment.

For what it's worth, we have 2 color KM devices, both with IQ-501's and the alignment is spot on throughout the entire run. It takes about 2 minutes and 1 sheet of paper to get it in alignment. We also have 3 b/w KM devices where we do the front/back alignment from the glass instead (the scanner where you make copies) and even though it takes a minute or two longer, once it's aligned, it holds perfectly throughout the entire run.
Click to expand...
Correct, ofcourse. I have that process already underway. Samples from more than half a dozen dealers across various brands.

The reason for posting here is to gain additional "subjective" insight into specialization of each brand and their line up. If there is market segmentation, that'd also be interesting to know.
 
usagfx said:
Correct, ofcourse. I have that process already underway. Samples from more than half a dozen dealers across various brands.

The reason for posting here is to gain additional "subjective" insight into specialization of each brand and their line up. If there is market segmentation, that'd also be interesting to know.
Click to expand...
Speaking of dealers, make sure you understand their level of expertise in the production space. Sometimes you'll run across a dealer (vs. direct from manufacturer) who has difficulty supporting them beyond simple break/fix.
 
[email protected] said:
Speaking of dealers, make sure you understand their level of expertise in the production space. Sometimes you'll run across a dealer (vs. direct from manufacturer) who has difficulty supporting them beyond simple break/fix.
Click to expand...
Thank you, in my process of getting demos and interacting with dealers & direct, I've seen a huge range of expertise from 100% salesmen to super high technical expertise.

So far my take from samples is the following:

  • Konica & Ricoh samples (the best ones) are almost identical in terms of color and resolution.
  • Konica has the highest variation from machine to machine (I've evaluated 4 different KM C4080s at different dealers and they produce wildly different outputs)
  • Canon has the higher consistency in flooded/patch areas. No mottling on textured papers.
  • Canon has lower resolution in real terms (when inspected with 16x loupe and 2pt text as well as resolution targets).
  • Canon black toner is much darker than both Ricoh and Konica
  • Toner gloss (default settings): Canon < Konica < Ricoh being the most glossy.
  • Canon's gloss control doesn't make that much difference but it is noticeable.
  • Konica has nice finishing options
  • Canon has two built-in spectrophotometers in the main engine, even without the Sensing Unit B1.
  • If you want registration calibration, you also have to get the document scanner feeder on the Canon. With Konica, you still get a platen glass.
  • Canon's build quality is nicer
  • Canon's control panel sucks and defining custom media is a pain in the ass. I saw so many folks struggling, even with their experience.
  • Konica's 1980's style user interface is actually amazing if you don't care about aesthetics. It works really well.

My take on the whole quoting process:
  • Everyone so far is professional and unlike car dealers
  • Prices vary WILDLY, it's unreal how much lee-way there is pricing
  • Dealers is obviously cheaper than Direct Sales
  • Canon demos are excellent, esp NYC showroom
  • Canon is significantly more expensive than Konica, especially controllers (both Fiery and PRISMAsync)
  • Canon's Sensing Unit B1 is ridiculously expensive
  • Canon's PRISMAsync controller information is sparse, can't even find a user guide

Thank you all for the guidance, I am definitely a little worn out from the process but hopefully can make a decision before EOY.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
KM AccurioPress C4070 or Ricoh ProC5300S or Canon Imagepress v700 or Fujifilm ApeosPro C650
Replies
6
Views
3K
jeremyd
J
T
Ricoh IM C6500 Opinions
Replies
3
Views
737
bcr
B
P
Canon C8000VP (used) - need advice!
Replies
5
Views
2K
namelessentity
N
T
User Experience needed: Thermotype NSF Ultra – reliability & quirks?
Replies
2
Views
871
life_in_a_duplex
L
T
Image quality - Canon Imagepress V700
Replies
8
Views
5K
ayunatsume
A
   
Back
Top