If a user can produce good print to screen matching using sound color management practices with a $399 Epson printer, I'd sure hope someone who invested the kind of money in a Lambda or Lightjet could as well.
Sounds logical, but it all assumes a design similar to an inkjet printer, wherein the user has control of the data going to the printer via the manufacturers driver.
Almost all of these legacy machines don't operate that way. You can't even effectively print a target out, because the firmware is going to step into the middle and manipulate the data. The design of these machines is assuming an sRGB file is coming in, so they are hard coded to calibrate to a norm that fits the sRGB input. Agreed it seems stupid, but when they were designed in the mid 90's color management wasn't even on their radar .
As I said, the technology of these machines was engineered and developed to work in a non-digital world trying to effectively simulate a traditional silver halide workflow , with assumptions based on a closed loops system, the goal was to crank out consumer snapshots. They have been adapted into professional applications, but the limitations of the design is something that makes it incredibly challenging to implement a color managed workflow similar to what can be had with current inkjet processes. Digital printing via scanning became very commonplace in the mid to late 90's, even in some professional applications, but it was still a silver halide workflow which at that time was assumed would be the primary capture method for at least a couple of more decades. Even the early versions of Kodaks DP2 software called Composite Machine employed color correction models that followed traditional methods, including methods to duplicate traditional CC filter corrections through the software.
It's tough for me to place much blame on current lab owners ... they just don't have any tools. I think there is growing pressure on labs to solve this problem, so some 3rd party options are out there, but for now most solutions are just tools that automate a work around, not actually solve the problem. I don't know if the manufacturers are working at all to solve the underlying problem ... for example the Durst optional CMS may be very good , or it might be a work around much like the 3rd party tools.
I'll admit we haven't purchased a new Noritsu for some time, but I haven't heard of any new developments coming from them. They are struggling now that most things have gone digital so far fewer places are converting, so the demand for new machines has dropped considerably. These machines can run for several years without any problem and they don't offer any real new technology to drive a need for replacement. I visited their headquarters in Japan 2.5 years ago, and completely stunned by their size and magnitude. A 12 story tower that included 3 floors of luxury hotel suites, helicopter pad, and numerous large manufacturing buildings. Even then you could see they were struggling ..they had shut down the hotel floors completely, there was no longer a helicopter for the helicopter pad, and R&D was being spent to find other products outside the photo industry to manufacture, and they were aggressively trying to develop inkjet solutions.
If you want a fully color managed workflow I don't think any silver halide process will provide that. You can "hack" around it and get pretty good results, most likely at the lowest price point possible, or you can move to inkjet output on high end Epson/Canon/HP printers either through a lab that offers that service or do it yourself. Unfortunately for inkjet, it can't even come close to competing with the material costs and speed of these silver halide printers, meaning most large full service labs will not be full inkjet output ... just can't handle the volume, and they can't offer competitive pricing.