Xerox 700 vs. Canon C6000

[PRINTLIFE]

I hear your concerns, but believe me the Xerox 700 does not use fuser oil s o the shine should not be there. This is an improvement over older technology.
What I have found is that Xerox always being more expensive, figured out that they need to be competitive and have great image quality...The 700 was born.
if you read the specs. you will see the 2400x2400dpi and the finishing makes this a great machine. No worries on intergration... They have the rips to support anything and have the Fiery which will take any file. Another thing I found is that you don't have a huge payment. It is a nice too step in without a huge investment but have the great output you need.
The small print on the Canon... You have to pay to return the device and it is third party financing not Canon.
Hope this helps!

Been stalking but not posting,-finally have something to ask! pardon me if my brain malfunctions while typing and I sound ridiculous

We're a commercial offset printer trying to enter the "digital world". We do a substantial amount of PURLS's which deserve nice VP, and otherwise want to supplement our offset work- either taking smaller jobs off press, handling overflow, securing new work, and/or allowing a costing option.
Additional thoughts are the ability to integrate with Prinergy, EFI Logic, Mindfire and Digital Storefronts.

Right now we are stuck between the Canon C6000 and the Xerox 700 - which really can't be more different when it comes to price.

The Xerox, besides feeling "too cheap" (worried about "the get what you pay for issues") has that lovely glossy sheen of toner on paper while the Canon does not.

So right now while we figure out what we want to sell and which we can sell better- my questions would be more on productivity, reliability, service and RIP issues.

Anyone have any feedback for me to contemplate?

 

[thebluesdude]

Another issue to look at guys is the physical size of the imaging unit...or more specifically the imaging belt. What no one tells you is that although some models quote a certain speed on stocks the 'new breed' of machines use a shorter belt which really slow the machine down in duplex mode as it can only feed two sheets in to the processing area at once. Example we just upgraded from a xerox 5252 which on medium weight runs stock at 16 pages of A3 per min. The xerox 5000 we bough runs all stock at 25 A3 per min. Put them both in duplex and the 5252 beats it in terms of speed because the imaging belt is twice the size. The 5000's belt is the same as the xerox 250! The 5000's a cracking machine for the money though

 

[kire]

XEROX 700 is not a production engine

XEROX 700 is not a production engine

Agh -first of all. Xerox 700 is not a digital color press,its a pretty normal printer with fancy finishing equipment. To compare this engine with IP6000 and other in the light production segment is just stupid. It has a good quality but that is also the case with lot of HP printers. This engine has not the qualitys and production spec that a professional printer needs. A lot of the discussions on the web is about registration,speed etc on this engine at it shows just one thing - this is not a digital color press!! Just take a look at the attached CED document - this engine is designed for volumes in the 20-75 000 range A4. This means are you producing mainly SRA3 this engine has a mnthly average below 10 000 prints. So scale up if you want to see and compare digital color presses!!

regards Kire

 

[rsands]

bottom line is it depends on were you are in the market and the volume you are pushing..if it suits your requirements at this stage of your business model/plan then go for it...if you have the quantity for a 5000...go for it....if you have the quantity for an igen...go for it

 

[GregNac19]

Agh -first of all. Xerox 700 is not a digital color press,its a pretty normal printer with fancy finishing equipment. To compare this engine with IP6000 and other in the light production segment is just stupid. It has a good quality but that is also the case with lot of HP printers. This engine has not the qualitys and production spec that a professional printer needs. A lot of the discussions on the web is about registration,speed etc on this engine at it shows just one thing - this is not a digital color press!! Just take a look at the attached CED document - this engine is designed for volumes in the 20-75 000 range A4. This means are you producing mainly SRA3 this engine has a mnthly average below 10 000 prints. So scale up if you want to see and compare digital color presses!!

regards Kire

Run 12X18 all the time with no issue at a 75,000 monthly volume. By the way, digital press's meaning depends on your requirements of a digital press.

 

[kire]

Run 12X18 all the time with no issue at a 75,000 monthly volume. By the way, digital press's meaning depends on your requirements of a digital press.

Of course it is a issue, just read the papers. To print 75,000 12x18 monthly on this engine is far away what it is made for and thats why you have to read and sign the CED document (after you have bought it). And it is not up to the customer choice to decide what is a digital press or not, if that is the case we have a lot of digital color presses in the market. Absolutely bull....

regards Kire

 

[GregNac19]

Of course it is a issue, just read the papers. To print 75,000 12x18 monthly on this engine is far away what it is made for and thats why you have to read and sign the CED document (after you have bought it). And it is not up to the customer choice to decide what is a digital press or not, if that is the case we have a lot of digital color presses in the market. Absolutely bull....

regards Kire

Relax man. If you bought the machine you should be happy. If you are not happy because it is not your specs. of a digital press, than your salesman and you did not get on the same page. If you are new to this site than you might not known about the CED. However, it should be required for anyone buying this type of product before even looking at the machine.

 

[kire]

Relax man. If you bought the machine you should be happy. If you are not happy because it is not your specs. of a digital press, than your salesman and you did not get on the same page. If you are new to this site than you might not known about the CED. However, it should be required for anyone buying this type of product before even looking at the machine.

Holy shit - this is just like talking to Jehovas witnesses. I just said if you want to produce that amount each month you are far away from the spec sheet or CED and I am not the only one saying that. Also Xerox says the same and to make sure you understand it, you must sign a document. If you dont want to read it or just believe what the salesman says, Xerox says that is your problem. And you dont get a CED up front, a lot of the discussions on this forum and similar forums points out this. And I have a lot of CED from different vendors, not just xerox, so I know a about them and also the purpose. And if you read thru Xerox 700 CED you have to agree that this is not a digital color press, its a digital color laser printer. And also Xerox did not place this engine in the digital color press segment when it was launched at Drupa last year and that was my only point.

Regards Kire
regards kire

 

[cosmo]

bottom line is it depends on were you are in the market and the volume you are pushing..if it suits your requirements at this stage of your business model/plan then go for it...if you have the quantity for a 5000...go for it....if you have the quantity for an igen...go for it

Correct, if you know what you can sell then whatever you buy should be based on projected turnover,

If you know you can sell 50,000 clicks a month with not much quality concern then go for a low end machine that fits that scenario.

If however you want to do 200,000 clicks a month and the customer is more discerning, then obviously you would purchase a larger volume machine to cope with that.

It all comes down to what you know you can sell, I know of printers using really shit machines but making a lot of money off them because they know there target market, pick your target and aim for it.

IGen, Indigo, Xerox, Konica, Canon, Ricoh etc all have there place in the market, it is up to you to figure out what market you want to sell too.

Personally, I run a print shop that does digital and offset, we have 5 color A2 size presses and 3 digital machines (or photocopiers which is what I still call them), we used to be with xerox but switched to Konica (c6500), mainly because the Konica looks more like offset than what the xerox machines could do.

Bang for buck Konica is a good machine, reliability Xerox is your choice, ive had the last 3 versions of Konica machines, they improve some things but sorely miss out on what was bad with them before, you really need a full time operator running the machine, clearing jams etc, and they dont feed anything but 100gsm copy paper with out problems, the engine is still a noahs ark design and it has been the same for about 5 years, registration is good, usually 2mm, which i consider to be acceptable with photocopiers on an SRA3 size sheet, another thing with Konica is actually how slow they do go on heavy weight papers, it is not what they advertise, it spends half the time adjusting and warming up during a run.

On the other hand, the Xerox production machines are just that, production machines, they do run hard and long without much intervention, heavy weight stocks cruise through and the overall design is far more solid, resolution is tight and solid looking but still too expensive for a smaller size shop.

With regards to the new Canons, they are touch better than Konica quality, not that great and a lot of roller marks, and way too overpriced, lots of running issues also, I know of 2 printers who are stuck with them and 1 that wants to take legal action to remove it from there premises.

 

[JaimeZ]

We just installed a Canon 6000 and are in love with it. We are a traditional offset shop and have always had the opinion that toner based equipment produced inferior quality impressions compared to ink on paper. The 6000 is great, in fact I may say that it rivals if not surpasses image quality of a conventional press for certain jobs. As for the reverse text on the 6000 I have not noticed it with the 6000, nor have I noticed it on the 7000VP, which a local printer has and we've been outsourcing to for about a year.

Can't give you an opinion on the Xerox digital presses, but some shops in the area that have one are suffering because of the cost and with business being down for most are looking for ways to get out of their Xerox digital presses and find cheaper alternatives. Xerox repair is top notch though.

The Canon 6000/7000 machines have a great service department and the three shops that have them in the area have nothing but high praise for them. The only issue I have heard is when running too much B&W work on them they can cause issues.

As has been posted already the 6000/7000 has no fuser oil--yes! We have already secured a contract for printing head shots for many actors and actresses (sorry feminists) with UV coating and imprinting signatures with our letterpress on top of the coating; and with no fuser oil we will be able to provide the quality for these clients. The Xerox 8000AP has fuser oil and the prints we've tested can not be UV coated.

Have heard good things about the KM6501, but it seemed to be too much of a copier and not a digital press. We replaced a Canon CLC4000 with the 6000 and are amazed with the difference, so why get a copier over a digital press? The reason we did not get the 7000VP was because of budget reasons--the 6000 fits well in our budget.

 

[Kingsfish]

fuzzy reversed text

fuzzy reversed text

issues with reversed text usually happen from a pc(not a mac) using the driver to get to the rip.

sometimes you can avoid it by not using the driver and dropping the file at the rip if it likes your native file format.

hope this is helpful.

 

[Creative-1]

Just attended On Demand and saw both versions. The VP has an additional fusing unit which allows it to keep up the speed with heavier stocks.

 

[lensam69]

Pricing...

Pricing...

I'm looking at the same two machines (X700 v C6000). I'm waiting to hear back from the Canon people, but so far, my pricing on the 700 with the Light production finisher with booklet maker + Hi-Cap feeder is coming out to $1283 plus .049 Color and .009 B&W

Can some members with either of these machines chime in as to what they're paying? I still don't trust copier salespeople .

Another question, if anyone has the booklet maker on the C6000; how does it behave?


Thanks in advance!

 

[ridety]

price

price

$1150/mo. on 5 yr. lease...includes 1 drawer hi cap feeder+light production finisher; internal fiery rip; .05 color/.01 black

 

[GregNac19]

$1150/mo. on 5 yr. lease...includes 1 drawer hi cap feeder+light production finisher; internal fiery rip; .05 color/.01 black

Does this include the interface module? Who is quoting this? Xerox or Global

 

[lensam69]

My xerox quote does include the interface module, and internal fiery. They're very tricky by the way.... The interface module is a "mandatory option" if you're planning on using the bookletmaker.

Quote comes straight from Xerox.

Ridety, does yours have the bookletmaker as well?

 

[AHoelzl]

One thing that you might want to consider is if the toner will has oil in it. It makes it hard for a finishing coat to be added off-line such as digital UV coating or lamination. If you plan on offering that to your customers, make sure your finishers have the correct coating to finish your job with. We just had a customer completely have to redo a job on a sheet-fed press because their digital copier had the oil in the toner and the toner smeared when the UV was applied. They were unaware that that could happen.

 

[JaimeZ]

Ahoelzl,

The Canon has no fuser oil. We have UV coated several jobs using conventional UV without issues, so is your response for those devices that use fuser oil? or is your response supposing that the Canon 6000/7000 machines have fuser oil in the toner? Because, they do not.

Can you give more details?

 

[AHoelzl]

I was not sure or not if either of the two used the fuser oil. The fuser oil seems to be something forgot to be mention and will affect off line finishing. I have run across same make, different models with some using the fuser oil. We always test run some sheets from the machine before we give a quote price on products run from a new machine. My info was more of an FYI with any digital press.

Thanks.

 

[JaimeZ]

Well, I must say that as an "ink on paper" printer, I used to have a major prejudice against toner based machines until I bought a Xante Ilumina two years ago and the Canon imagePress 6000 last month. Both do not have fuser oil and provide a printed sheet that looks like offset. The Canon even does it on coated gloss sheets. And I have found that both take UV coating very well. Scoring can be an issue when having to score through a solid, but we've experienced similar issues with conventional printing as well. Also, I'm not comparing the Ilumina with the imagePress; the imagePress outproduces the Ilumina in many ways, but I dare anyone run envelopes on it. The Ilumina runs envelopes very well and small sized thick stocks too, the imagePress doesn't.