RTC360 or X9

[emmaird]

Hi. I have an X7 and I want to change it to a RTC360, but bumped into X9.
I want the point loud slice noise smaller like in RTC360 rather than 7-10 mm in X7, longer range.
On top of that, Cyclone360 lets you remove points that move during the scan and the registration is faster.
Cyclone registration was fast, recognised all the set up, where realworks needed the spheres. RW does not let you remove the moving objects, you have to do it after the registration.
X9 and RTC360 will have similar range 120-150m, but as I use this for as built we will set up under 100 m anyway.

What do you reckon?

[Peyman Bashiri]

You can consider the X12 which is essentially ZF5016 as well.
Peyman

[JonathanP]

Is sphere/target registration definitely being added to TBC? Is that something you have heard from a reliable source?

[Ioannis]

I would go for rtc360 way better, get a demo of the and you will understand the differences Leica is a way ahead from Trimble in scanning!

[stevenramsey]

Could depend on the sort of work you are planning to do with it.

[Kruse]

Hi. I have an X7 and I want to change it to a RTC360, but bumped into X9.
I want the point loud slice noise smaller like in RTC360 rather than 7-10 mm in X7, longer range.
On top of that, Cyclone360 lets you remove points that move during the scan and the registration is faster. Real works needs the spheres, although I know that TBC will introduce spheres next year, so we can process that directly in TBC. We do SX10 scans right into TBC.
Cyclone registration was fast, recognised all the set up, where realworks needed the spheres. RW does not let you remove the moving objects, you have to do it after the registration.
X9 and RTC360 will have similar range 120-150m, but as I use this for as built we will set up under 100 m anyway.

What do you reckon?

We use both in our company, but use them for different workflows and needs at the project. X9 is powerful when you need as-builts in the field to then compare against BIM models or do some quick elevation heat maps of a concrete deck or horizontal surface (with Perspective/Field Link on their tablet). compared to the RTC, scanning is still much slower with the X9 and the registration still needs to be finalized in RW after the fact in the office. Perspective hasn't quite nailed it with accurate, tight registration on the more difficult scanning scenarios we usually encounter on job sites therefore we always finish them on the office side. The X9 moderately increased their scan speeds, range, and noise compared to the X7, but comparing to an RTC, it's still a few steps behind in speed, accuracy/noise, and the office software is slower.

RTC's have great scan accuracy and noise levels for the vast majority of our projects, so we rely on those far more often for accurate as-builts. In our company scanner fleet, we're probably 45% Leica RTC's, 45% FARO, and 10% Trimble. I prefer the RTC and going off past performance and issues from the X7's we have, the Leica's are also far more reliable long term. The X9 is still too new to have a good long term review for us. Just my two cents though.

[Jamesrye]

Go and scan something with fine details in it, like a steel frame building. Then compare the scan data. The RTC360 picks up more fine detail in my tests. Much less noise in the data too.

[cesaralmeida]

Hi.

The comment about the removing objects previous to registration... you can do that in RW. Myself or a colleague can show that to you. Please reach out, we'll setup something.

I do agree that the workflow is always key. What are you trying to achieve and how best to get there.

Regarding software developments, things are always improving over time.

The introduction of sphere or target based registration into software packages that did not have that before is a requirement from many customers.

Again, it always depends on the workflow. A lot of customers are just not into scanning at all, for as-builts. That doesn't make them wrong.

All good.

Hi. I have an X7 and I want to change it to a RTC360, but bumped into X9.
I want the point loud slice noise smaller like in RTC360 rather than 7-10 mm in X7, longer range.
On top of that, Cyclone360 lets you remove points that move during the scan and the registration is faster. Real works needs the spheres, although I know that TBC will introduce spheres next year, so we can process that directly in TBC. We do SX10 scans right into TBC.
Cyclone registration was fast, recognised all the set up, where realworks needed the spheres. RW does not let you remove the moving objects, you have to do it after the registration.
X9 and RTC360 will have similar range 120-150m, but as I use this for as built we will set up under 100 m anyway.

What do you reckon?

[Augusto 3D]

Went from an X7 to a Faro, tried and RTC on a large project and are still happier with our Faro unit. Just something else to consider if you want better point clouds.

[pburrows145]

If you want my totally biased opinion - go for the RTC360...