Multifunction Devices: More Space On The Desktop! – THG.RU

More Space on the Desktop!

Printers and scanners may still be the pride and joy of their makers for a few more months, but these devices are on their way out. The drop in sales proves it. This is the fault of a new breed of device: the multifunction inkjet. Why buy separate scanners and printers when you can get both functions in a single product? The question is all the more relevant since many of these devices also have a document feeder, a memory card reader, a color fax, etc.

Market Players

This first comparative test of inkjet technology devices covers four manufacturers. These are the main players in the conventional printer market, bar none: Epson. We were not able to get hold of their new CC-550L which recently came out in Japan but is mostly unavailable in the rest of the world. The other three leaders, Canon, HP and Lexmark, are currently represented on the market. They are all well aware that the printer market is on its way out and that they now need to corner the all-in-one sector. This is what has attracted the newcomer, Brother, which has developed its own inkjet technology and, like Canon, offers a model with separate cartridges.

HP has an interesting analysis. According to them, to understand why these products are taking off, all you need to do is compare the graphics system (printing and scanning) to the hi-fi system, where originally sound components (cassette player, turntable, tuner, etc.) were separate devices, just as with the printer and scanner today. The traditional hi-fi system is now being taken over by the mini-system, although separate systems still exist, usually in the top of the range. The same should apply to standalone printers in the future: only very specialized models, such as those for very high resolution photo work, will be able to survive the onslaught of multifunctional models.

Recycled Mechanisms

For the time being, the multifunctional devices on the market are fast, but their integrated print motors are all from the previous generation. The Canon MPC400 is built on the famous S630, which has since been replaced by the S750. The HP PSC 950 is based on the Deskjet 970cxi, and the Lexmark X83 is based on the Z42. The current trend is thus a choice: either a separate, high-tech printer, or else an all-in-one which uses the previous generation’s system.

Tests and Methods

The tests were run on a Dell computer, a Dimension 8100 with the following main features:

• MS Windows XP Professional
• Intel Pentium 4 at 1600 MHz
• 256 MB RAM

The methods used were a combination of those that apply to inkjet printers and scanners. To assess the behavior of the devices in autonomous mode, we added extra color and black-and-white photocopy tests, plus photo reproduction and enlargement.

Printer Tests

The printer tests were done in all the resolutions available, with all kinds of documents, from plain text to high-definition photos. Most of the speed tests were done with the printer_speed.doc file available online on ici. The complete method (from draft to photo) is described here.

Scanner tests

The method we used was exactly the same as the one used for our first 1200 dpi scanner test, which you can find here — therefore, the tests were done from 75 to 1200 dpi, with and without de-screening, and with analysis of color fidelity.

Document Reproduction Tests

All the tests were run via the all-in-one control panel, so the PC was not used.

• Photocopy of one, and then ten copies of a document in black and white, followed by color.
• Enlargement to A4 format, in black and white followed by color, of a 10 x 15 cm photo.

Rankings

There are two tables that rank the products based on certain criteria, scored with points ranging from 1 to 5. The first table, which appears at the end of each product review, summarizes each product by test category:

• Cost of use: based on purchase price and ink-per-page costs.
• Ergonomics: relates to size, functions available, control panel, etc.
• Overall speed: speed in printing / scanning / photocopying.
• Overall quality: quality of printing / scanning / photocopying.
• Photo mode: involves quality of printing and enlargements, plus speed, in photo mode.
• Office mode: speed of printing / scanning / photocopying in low and medium definition.

The second table appears on the conclusion page:

• Cost of use: based on the purchase price and ink-per-page costs.
• Ergonomics: relates to size, functions available, control panel, etc..
• Printer: average of print speed and quality.
• Scanner: average of scanning speed and quality.
• Photocopier: average of photocopy speed and quality.

Brother MFC 590

Brother, the great laser specialist, developed its own inkjet technology to break into the multifunctional color device market. But while it may have a page feeder and fax, the MFC 590 is not about to upset the established order. Brother needs to do some more homework on its products. This one is slow and its print quality is poor.

Note: The Brother all-in-one is called MFC-590 in Europe and MFC-5100c in the USA. We were sent an MFC-590 for our tests.

Ergonomics

The MFC 590 / 5100c is very big, almost as bulky as the Canon SmartBase / MultiPass, and is the only one of these devices to have both, a document feeder and a fax. Another good point is that the button on the front enables you to stop the work in progress. The control panel is straightforward, with all the works, but not as smart as a Lexmark or HP.

Printer

Like an Epson, the draft mode can be used for fast printing, but in poor quality. The resulting pages are only good for checking layout. Results are better if the resolution is increased, but then the speed is halved. In default resolution, the characters still lack precision and the colors are uneven. So you have no choice but to work at top resolution if your documents are designed for business purposes. The results will not be too bad, but won’t have the quality of those in normal resolution on the Canon and HP devices. Forget about photos; the MFC 590 is not designed for them and results are disappointing.

The cost per page in normal resolution is fairly low, almost the same as the Canon SmartBase / MultiPass.

At 3000 pages (purchase price + 1500 monochrome pages + 1500 color pages), the cost works out at $636, which is a lot higher than the Canon multifunction, but lower than HP and Lexmark.

Scanner

The scanner function is slow and not very true. The scanned photos are of poorer quality than usual for a flatbed scanner, but are quite adequate enough for an office context where requirements typically go no further than text and graphs.

Note that the driver supplied was not fully developed. In fact, it is the Windows generic driver and the trouble is that it deprives the MFC 590 of some of its functions. The Windows XP scanning range is only 100 to 600 ppp (Brother claims this is temporary), and not 75 to 9600 ppp, as originally intended.

Photocopier

As you’d expect, the MFC 590 reproductions are not as good as on the other three devices. The copies come out fairly fast but their quality is not up to the level of those from the HP. As with the printer tests, the highest resolution available is still not adequate for photo reproduction.

Ranking

Canon SmartBase MPC400

Canon offers two devices: the F30 (USA) / MPC400 (Europe) and the F50 / MPC600F. The difference between them is that the latter has a color fax and document feeder, whereas the first, the one we tested, does not. So, for personal use you might prefer the MPC400 / F30, while for professional use, the MPC600F / F50 may be a better fit.

Apart from that, the mechanics (printer, scanner and fax) are the same. In the end, even though it lacks a number of functions and is rather expensive, the MPC400 beat its rivals by a short length due to the lowest cost per page, fast print motor, print quality and integrated scanner quality.

Note: the Canon all-in-one is called SmartBase MPC400 in Europe and MultiPass F30 in USA. We were sent a SmartBase MPC400 for our tests.

Ergonomics

The design is plain and the control panel no-nonsense. The MPC400 / F30 will have you believing in its effectiveness. Access to the basic controls – number of copies, color or black and white – is direct. On the whole, after a bit of initial fumbling, you get the hang of it pretty well. The worst feature of the MPC400 ergonomics is its bulkiness – nearly twice the size of the HP PSC 950. The space saved, as opposed to a scanner plus a separate printer, is virtually nil.

Printer

As expected, print quality is the same as with the S630 — in other words, excellent. It is much better than Brother and Lexmark, though the document output quality is a tad less than that of the PSC 950, which still holds the advantage, especially in photo mode. Although, MPC400 performance in high resolution is greater than the PSC 950: its 10 x 15 cm photos print in under 1 minute, versus four times that for its three rivals.

Likewise, the cost per page, the same as for the S630, is the lowest of all.

At 3000 pages, this works out to $349 (€628) when you calculate purchase price + 1500 monochrome pages + 1500 color pages. This is half the cost of the HP PSC 950.

Since we had to complete our first test run, we tested two different MPC400s in succession. The first worked fine, but the second gave us some trouble. It performed well in all resolutions except one.

In the default monochrome resolution, the device pauses at mid-page. You could always hastily assume this is due to a one-off fault, but unfortunately this is something we have already encountered on the earlier S600, S530 and S630 models. When informed, Canon exchanged the goods, claiming a defect in the pre-series designed for the press. And the defect had indeed disappeared in the final product delivered later. But this time, the MPC we tested was a final product and Canon has not yet managed to come up with an explanation other than memory saturation, which is rather unconvincing. Why should it saturate in monochrome mode and not the others, especially the weightier high-definition color ones? The thing is, each time we ran into this problem, it was the same thing: when printing a batch of pages in monochrome mode, the first one sails through, but for the remainder of the pages, the device pauses halfway into the process – a lull of variable length, but which can last up to 16 seconds. This brings down its performance. The defect seems unrelated to the driver: we encountered it in the photocopy tests, and even when the printer is disconnected from a PC and working in autonomous mode.

So our advice to you, if your device is affected by this problem, is to remember that it is not systematic, so try and get the warranty to work in your favor and hope the replacement will work properly.

Scanner

The scanner integrated into the MPC400, while not exceptional, gave the best scans out of the four devices every time. It adjusts the moirй effect automatically and very efficiently. Still, don’t expect too much from it. You should generally try to avoid enlarging, for instance, when it involves a resolution higher than its optics. One feature could stand some improvement: color fidelity. This one is better than Brother and Lexmark, which are both quite poor, but not as good as the HP. It works quite quickly, especially in the lower definitions: It only takes 15 seconds to preview and scan a 10 x 15 cm photo at 75 ppp.

Photocopier

Since the printer is both fast and excellent, and the scanner is satisfactory, one would expect the photocopy mode to be good as well. And so it is, apart from the speed defect in default monochrome mode (see previous page). If we hadn’t had this problem, the MPC400 would be the fastest device in all tests. We measured continual output (on 10 consecutive photocopies) of 2.4 and 3 pages/min, in monochrome and color, respectively. Actually, the reproduction test on a single page gives a better idea of speed in black and white. The photocopy comes out in just 17 seconds, meaning a theoretical 3.5 pages/min instead of 2.4. All the copies were of good quality, except the photo enlargement in monochrome mode.

Ranking

HP PSC 950

Unlike its little stable-mate the PSC 750, the PSC 950 has a fax and memory card reader, and its Deskjet 970cxi print motor is a bit faster. The whole thing is a general use device which would have been perfect, were it not for that major and mostly unforgivable failing: the cost per page is nearly three times more than for Canon printers.

Ergonomics

One of the best things about the PSC 950 is that it is hardly bigger than a printer. It takes up half the room of its Brother and Canon rivals. Special attention has been paid to the control panel, which gives you easy access to all the parameters and smart indications.

The PSC 950 can also print pictures stored on the memory card of a digital camera, even without using a PC. You just insert it into the relevant drive and press Index Photo. It prints out a page with the thumbnails of the pictures on the card, then you just check the ones you want, specify the number of copies and paper quality, put the page on the scanner window and press Index Photo again. The PSC 950 adjusts, realigns and prints out the photos automatically. How about that!

Printer

As usual, printouts are excellent, from lowest to highest resolution. It’s not lightning fast in default resolution, but for a quick job, draft mode is quite adequate, as good as the normal resolution of most printers on the market. As ever with HP, photos print out very slowly, but they are very good, in both black and white and color.

Likewise, as is typical of HP, the cost per page is much higher than the average. The PSC 950 is a very good product, but very expensive to use.

At 3000 pages (purchase price + 1500 monochrome pages + 1500 color pages) this is $996 (€1196), twice that of a Canon all-in-one device.

Scanner

A positive aspect is its speed. It takes just 7 seconds to preview a document, and that’s three times faster than the X83. A negative aspect is that, though fast, it does a poor job. The images have too much contrast, the device does not include moirй adjustment, interpolation is poor and the lightest areas come out pale. The PSC 950 is no replacement for a scanner when you need to touch up and reproduce photos.

Photocopier

While the integrated scanner does a poor job, the photocopies are of fairly good quality. Go for the color reproductions: the characters are rendered more finely than in monochrome.

Note that the PSC 950 is the only multifunction device which can do satisfactory photo reproduction in monochrome mode.

Ranking

Lexmark X83

The X83 is the luxury version of the X73. Lexmark has embellished it with a liquid crystal screen and 8 MB of memory to speed up the device and make it easier to work in autonomous mode. But it is also far and away the cheapest in the test. Its cost per page is reasonable and its speed is medium though adequate, making it a very good starter device.

Ergonomics

Lexmark has focused on the essentials, so there is no question of page feeders, faxes or card readers. The X83 prints, scans and photocopies, period. The control panel is thus completely devoid of embellishments – it is both very plain and very efficient.

Printer

The X83 is built upon a Z42 motor, so it gave us no surprises. It is just as fast in black and white, and just as slow in color.

No surprises in the cost per page either. It is lower than the HP but higher than Canon and Brother.

At 3000 pages (purchase price + 1500 monochrome pages + 1500 color pages) this is $676 (?956), similar to the long-term cost for a Canon all-in-one. So the choice of an X83 is justified if you don’t intend to print a lot.

Scanner

The X83 fails in part of its mission: it is no replacement for a separate scanner. The integrated one here is very bad and errs too much toward the yellow. Using it for scanning photos to make an album is quite simply not wise.

Left: scan by the Canon MultiPass; right: by the X83.

Photocopier

While the scanner is appalling, the X83 gave us magnificent monochrome photocopies. The characters are nearly perfect with practically no undesirable drops. You could almost mistake the copy for the original.

Color work, apart from photos, is good, though we noted that the colors reproduced were lighter, no doubt the fault of the scanner. Another thing is that the black characters are spoilt by drops of blue, and there is a loss of definition in the text zones. So it would be best to do without color where the X83 is six times slower than in monochrome mode.

The weakness of the scanner shows up even more when you work in photo mode to reproduce or enlarge pictures. You’ll probably give it one go, but not two. Whether in color or, worse, black and white, the result is really bad and not even up to a starter-price printer combined with a cheap scanner.

Ranking

Because pricing policies in the US are different from Europe, the X83 and its cartridges are cheaper in America, which means that this all-in-one has different operating costs in each of these two regions.

Conclusion

The perfect device does not exist yet. They all have a lot of failings, which could also be considered growing pains for a new type of device. One manufacturer might have forgotten to integrate a de-screening function while another might have neglected the reproduction of black and white photos; one of them might design a control panel that is too complicated, while another finds that its speed falls apart in color mode, and so on. For the same price, you will often find you get better results with separate middle-range scanners and printers.

Be that as it may, the all-in-one should corner the market in the end. The photocopy mode and the inclusion of a fax or document feeder will please businesses, small organizations and professionals. Home users will probably be more attracted by the HP PSC 950, which is more elegant and very easy to use, although maybe not too frequently, on account of its costly cartridges.

Brother MFC-590

With a focus on business, its control panel recalls that of a photocopier. The page feeder is handy: it simplifies batch photocopying and fax transmission. On the other hand, it’s a shame the MFC is so bulky and that its prints are not better. Its maximum quality may be inadequate for business use.

Canon SmartBase MPC400

Based on the S630 motor, the SmartBase MPC400 prints fast and well in all resolutions, and is the cheapest of all in ink costs. But this device is harder to control than the Lexmark and HP models. It is also much bigger and not really very well designed for home users.

HP PSC 950

This would be the ideal product if it weren’t for that devilish cost per page which spoils everything. Printing with this device turns out to be really expensive: $0.24 (€0.32) for a page covered at just 5%. This is all the more a pity because the photo printing function in autonomous mode is really impressive and efficient. Let’s hope that HP will make amends in its future products and that the designers of their multifunction devices will use the opportunity to integrate a better scanner than the current one.

Lexmark X83

This will be your product of choice if you are looking for a straightforward solution which is inexpensive and not too bulky. On the whole, its monochrome print results are good, but it slows down considerably when working in color. Its best feature is the quality of its photocopies and its worst means you’d be advised to scan text only. The photos it scans are really poor and err far too much towards the yellow.