OKI pioneered the use of LEDs in print engines and this is a mid-priced colour machine. It’s deeper than it is wide, due to the in-line design of its engine. The simple control panel is well designed, with a two-line, backlit LCD. The standard paper tray takes 250-sheets, with a second tray optional, and there’s a generous 100-sheet multi-purpose feed. USB and network connections are standard and speed results were 16ppm for black, 12ppm for colour, with a healthy 11.5ppm printing duplex. Black text and colour graphics are fine, but the colour gamut is too limited to do photos justice. Running costs, at 2.0p for black and 11.8p for colour, are about average.
Reg Rating 70%
More info Oki
Billed as a very fast colour laser for workgroups, this printer managed 18ppm under test, which is fast, but not breathtaking. It did 12.5ppm in colour and 9.5ppm duplex, which is also only fair. The big machine has a traditional design, with a 250-sheet main tray and a 100-sheet multi-purpose feed, with a full-width control panel, using a four-way, illuminated navigation ring. USB and network connections are standard and print quality is sharp with attention-seeking colours. Running costs, at 2.4p for black and 10.6p for colour, are mid-range. Don’t pay too much attention to the printer’s RRP; it can be had for under £400.
Reg Rating 80%
More info Samsung
Next page: Xerox Phaser 6010
Solid ink, right...
While the Xerox solid ink printers produce nice looking printouts, they also produce a bad smell and need to placed in a well ventilated area. Also, if you only occasionally print with them, they waste a lot of ink on start-up and it's a slow printer anyway, especially if the printer was off.
The whole roundup is stupid anyway. The prices range from 139 to 634, and the blurb on the first page states "Here are ten, capable colour lasers you should consider for a short list" but the reviewer has given 60% verdict to two printers. Why would I put the Xerox 6010 on my short list if the reviewer states that "it may be OK". That HP is noisy, slow and the previous cheap HP carousel models were also prone to break.
Clearly the reviewer works in a retailer or distributor and reviews whatever he has handy there. And that's just fine. But these reviews should be more consistent. Comparing a £200 laptop to a £2000 model makes no sense, why do it with printers?
No mention of OS compatibility.
Even the ones running on Ethernet are not necessarily postscript compatible, and some Linux drivers are crap (or non-existant)
It's all well & good listing the running costs for the printers, but of equal importance for a small office is noise.
I've found that many colour laser printers can be incredibly noisy, especially the carousel models that rotate the toner cartridges between passes.
Any chance of adding a noise level next time you review printers?