Compare SMEG 50’s Retro Style Drip Coffee Maker vs Ninja Luxe Café Premier Espresso, Drip Coffee and Cold Brew Machine

Accessory evidence is limited, but one reviewer valued the included measuring scoop as helping portion grounds correctly.

Reviewers generally liked the included kit, especially the unpressurized baskets, portafilter, tamper, cleaning items, and guide; one review highlighted the accessories as above budget standard.

Reviewers felt Ninja largely delivered on its core claims around ease, versatility, barista assistance, and cold drink capability rather than merely overpromising.

Setup was consistently described as easy, with reviewers noting simple initial preparation and little to assemble.

Setup was described as painless or well documented, with useful quick-start guidance, though first-time use can still take around 20 minutes.

Reviewers generally liked the programmable timer and auto-start function, calling it convenient, easy to set and useful for wake-up coffee.

Automation and sensors were praised for reducing guesswork, guarding against wrong setup, and guiding grind changes, but a few reviewers found the assist logic finicky or prone to chasing corrections.

Brewing performance was mostly positive for standard drip coffee: reliable, consistent and flavorful enough, though not positioned as specialty-level brewing.

Most reviews found espresso and coffee output consistent and capable, especially after dialing in, while a minority reported shot-ratio inconsistency or long programmed yields.

Build quality was split: some praised metal construction, sturdiness and long-term durability, while others criticized plastic parts, a flimsy handle or failure after extended use.

Build impressions ranged from sturdy and above-budget to concerns about plastic parts, chipping accessories, and uncertain long-term durability.

Only one reviewer judged the cord length directly, calling it good for most kitchens while noting some users may find it short.

Capacity was usually adequate for households or multiple mugs, but reviewers repeatedly noted Smeg cup sizing makes the 10-cup claim feel smaller in real mugs.

Capacity drew praise for the large reservoir, hopper, travel-mug clearance, and flexible cup sizes, but the machine remains better for individual servings than batch brewing.

Carafe handling drew mixed reactions, with praise for ergonomics and pause-and-serve but complaints about non-dishwasher-safe glass and flimsy or awkward details.

Cup and tray handling was mixed: reviewers liked adjustable trays and travel-mug clearance, but repeatedly criticized the two-spout design, tight fit, basket handling, and drip-tray hassles.

Design is the strongest consensus point: reviewers repeatedly loved the retro styling, colors and countertop presence, while some still criticized its large footprint.

Design opinions were polarized: several reviewers liked the stylish or appealing look, while others found it bulky, space-hungry, plasticky, or unattractive.

Design flaws centered on bulk, footprint and missing or imperfect convenience features, especially the lack of a standard brew-pause feature in one review.

Design flaws centered on missing hot water in some markets, awkward dual spouts, ratio quirks, bean switching, non-abortable workflows, and cramped ergonomics.

Packaging comments were positive where mentioned, especially the zero-plastic or recyclable-cardboard presentation.

Packaging sustainability was a clear negative in CoffeeGeek reviews because the machine used too much styrofoam or polystyrene.

Beverage quality was acceptable to good for drip coffee, with praise for smooth, clean or tasty cups but repeated caveats that the coffee is standard rather than exceptional.

Espresso and drinks were usually praised as good to excellent for the price, with rich crema, strong milk-drink performance, and some caveats around acidity or ultimate enthusiast quality.

The reusable filter was mostly praised for convenience, low waste and durability, though one reviewer only rated it decent rather than exceptional.

Filter baskets were viewed positively because they are real, traditional, non-pressurized baskets rather than pressurized beginner baskets.

The grinder, hopper, and dosing system were among the strongest features, especially weight-based dosing, scale integration, quietness, and helpful guidance, though some assist recommendations were imperfect.

Tamper feedback was mostly positive for level, low-mess puck prep, but the 601's separate dosing ring and tamper workflow was called fiddly by some reviewers.

Heating performance evidence was negative where scored, with the warming function failing to keep coffee hot enough in one detailed review.

Heating performance was praised for fast warm-up, hot early shots, and minimal preheating, with thermoblock/grouphead behavior seen as effective for the category.

The absent hot-water dispenser on the US/Canada Premier was one of the most consistent complaints, especially for americanos, tea, and cup preheating.

Cold drink performance was divided: cold foam and some cold brew modes impressed many reviewers, but others found cold brew less deep, bitter, warm, or underwhelming.

Used-puck cleanup split by mode: espresso pucks often knocked out cleanly, while filter-style coffee could leave soupy, messy pucks or require rinsing.

Milk frothing was broadly liked for hands-free foam, cold foam, and beginner ease, but some reviewers disliked auto texture, plant-milk results, pitcher shape, noise, or wand cleaning demands.

Overall experience varied widely: many found it simple, quiet and pleasant, while harsher reviews said the quirks and tradeoffs outweighed the looks.

Overall user experience was strongly positive for beginners and café-style drink variety, with repeated praise for ease, versatility, and fun despite quirks.

Popularity evidence was limited but positive, with one reviewer noting the machine had become a hit on Instagram.

Reviewers described strong attention and status for the machine, calling it top-rated or one of the most asked-about mainstream coffee launches.

Portability was mixed: one reviewer found it easy to move, while another emphasized its hefty weight and countertop bulk.

Portability was weak: the machine was described as big, bulky, and heavy, making it unsuitable for tight spaces or frequent moving.

Pot and keep-warm performance was mixed: some found the warming program effective, while others complained that 20, 40 or 60 minutes was not enough for their habits.

Pot or batch-coffee capability was weak because reviewers emphasized individual cups, limited 18-ounce brews, and flawed filter-style coffee rather than carafe use.

Pump pressure was only directly judged once, where the reviewer felt pressure regulation worked well and avoided stalling or spraying.

Recognition evidence was positive, with CoffeeGeek considering it for Espresso Machine of the Year and later calling it a market disruptor.

Accessory storage was a clear convenience win, with reviewers praising integrated side storage and organized accessory compartments.

Speed evidence was generally acceptable rather than fast; reviewers noted full jugs take several minutes but slower brewing helps avoid weak coffee.

Speed was a frequent positive, with fast heat-up, quick grinding, sub-minute espresso pulls, and reasonably quick coffee or cold drink workflows.

Value was one of the most divided areas: style-focused reviewers accepted the premium, but coffee-focused reviewers called it expensive for standard drip performance.

Value was one of the strongest consensus points: reviewers repeatedly called it excellent, disruptive, or unusually capable for the price.

Warranty and support evidence was negative, with one long-term owner saying help was difficult after a breakdown and no remedy was provided beyond the 12-month warranty.

Warranty and support evidence was limited but mildly positive, noting a one-year warranty, extension options, and affordable spare parts.

The water system was the most repeated complaint: reviewers criticized the narrow, awkward reservoir and, in some cases, overly frequent descaling alerts, though one long-term review praised easy descaling.

Water and maintenance feedback was mixed: reviewers liked water-hardness setup, cleaning prompts, and simple cleanup, but criticized no filter, hard reservoir access, high purge water use, and frequent drip-tray emptying.