New Z+F Imager

Discuss all Z+F related issues here.
MagicBrou
I have made 80-90 posts
I have made 80-90 posts
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:49 am
4
Full Name: Julian Weber
Company Details: Stadt Reutlingen
Company Position Title: director of engineering surveying
Country: Germany
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by MagicBrou »

landmeterbeuckx wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:41 pm
Formula1982 wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:25 pm
MagicBrou wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 12:57 pm also you need a software which makes use of the compensator data, many don't...

the TX8 is indeed very strong with compensation and you don't need that many Control Points along long Buldings.

The Z+F is also very very Strong with Compensation and for me the best Laserscanner on the market.

In fact the 5016 is still after 5 years far ahead to all other Scanners on the Market so there is no need to release a new one.
Out of interest, why do you say the 5016 is ahead of other scanners on the market?
We trialled it when it was relatively new, was very impressed with it on a technical level but it was just too slow to be a viable upgrade compared to the competition. It still has the speed of scanners from 10 years ago. There are the RTC360 and Trimble X7 scanners which are both considerably faster, have great imagery and crisp, clean data, and I believe are cheaper. The auto registration I think is quicker and more reliable too, but maybe the software has improved in the past few years.

We used a 5016 last year on a project using a client's own scanner and were getting less than 20 scans per day. Around 15 minutes per position. If we had been using one of our RTC360's for the same job and same deliverable we'd have done the job in 1 week instead of 3.

Very interested to know your experience, and how it differs from mine.
Don't know the speeds but comparing an X7 with a z&f is like comparing a lada with an mercedes. Data from a x7 is very poor.
Riegl being the Rolls of scanners of course;-)
totally right, you just need to compare the noise of the x7 and the poor range of 70m.... and then you know how worth it is to have a riegl or z+f :]...
User avatar
Formula1982
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:02 pm
6
Full Name: Stephen Ferrari
Company Details: UTEC StarNet Geomatics
Company Position Title: Technical Lead
Country: United Kingdom
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by Formula1982 »

MagicBrou wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:46 pm
landmeterbeuckx wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:41 pm
Formula1982 wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:25 pm

Out of interest, why do you say the 5016 is ahead of other scanners on the market?
We trialled it when it was relatively new, was very impressed with it on a technical level but it was just too slow to be a viable upgrade compared to the competition. It still has the speed of scanners from 10 years ago. There are the RTC360 and Trimble X7 scanners which are both considerably faster, have great imagery and crisp, clean data, and I believe are cheaper. The auto registration I think is quicker and more reliable too, but maybe the software has improved in the past few years.

We used a 5016 last year on a project using a client's own scanner and were getting less than 20 scans per day. Around 15 minutes per position. If we had been using one of our RTC360's for the same job and same deliverable we'd have done the job in 1 week instead of 3.

Very interested to know your experience, and how it differs from mine.
Don't know the speeds but comparing an X7 with a z&f is like comparing a lada with an mercedes. Data from a x7 is very poor.
Riegl being the Rolls of scanners of course;-)
totally right, you just need to compare the noise of the x7 and the poor range of 70m.... and then you know how worth it is to have a riegl or z+f :]...
Good point, the range isn't as much and the data isn't as clean. But this sort of scanner is usually used (or at least for us) for building up a network of 360 degree scans at short range. Most target objects are within 20m. So in reality any range past about 50m is in most case not much benefit, just nice. If we wanted to scan something at a distance, we'd use something built more for that sort of longer range scanning like a SX10 or P50. And if the data is clean enough, then more clean is nicer, but not worth waiting 15 minutes for when the X7 will be on to it's 3rd or 4th scan by the time the 5016 is completing it's 1st. The RTC360 has a range of 130m, and would be on to it's 5th scan by the time the 5016 was still on it's 1st.

To me, the 5016 has a weird place in the market. If you want a long range scanner, I'd go Reigl or P50. If you want an accurate, clean data, I'd go Surphaser. If you want to do 'area' scanning with 360's, I'd go RTC360. If you want on-site registration, I'd go X7.
So as an all-rounder, it hits more marks than any other. But it's a jack of all trades and master of none. Do many people want an all-rounder these days which is always at a disadvantage to the other guy who has the right tool for the element which is of most concern, whether it's speed, accuracy, range? It doesn't seem to have a niche in the market, except for someone who only wants to buy a single scanner they can do lots of different jobs with. But to me, that's like a tradesman opening the back of their van to reveal that they only own a leatherman multi-tool.

When I've used it, i've been very impressed with the tech but just couldn't see where it would fit 'on the shelf' for a specific use case. And it's not cheap either. Would love to hear how other people have used it and found it to be the right tool for the job.
User avatar
Formula1982
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2015 4:02 pm
6
Full Name: Stephen Ferrari
Company Details: UTEC StarNet Geomatics
Company Position Title: Technical Lead
Country: United Kingdom
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by Formula1982 »

landmeterbeuckx wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:41 pm
Formula1982 wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:25 pm
MagicBrou wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 12:57 pm also you need a software which makes use of the compensator data, many don't...

the TX8 is indeed very strong with compensation and you don't need that many Control Points along long Buldings.

The Z+F is also very very Strong with Compensation and for me the best Laserscanner on the market.

In fact the 5016 is still after 5 years far ahead to all other Scanners on the Market so there is no need to release a new one.
Out of interest, why do you say the 5016 is ahead of other scanners on the market?
We trialled it when it was relatively new, was very impressed with it on a technical level but it was just too slow to be a viable upgrade compared to the competition. It still has the speed of scanners from 10 years ago. There are the RTC360 and Trimble X7 scanners which are both considerably faster, have great imagery and crisp, clean data, and I believe are cheaper. The auto registration I think is quicker and more reliable too, but maybe the software has improved in the past few years.

We used a 5016 last year on a project using a client's own scanner and were getting less than 20 scans per day. Around 15 minutes per position. If we had been using one of our RTC360's for the same job and same deliverable we'd have done the job in 1 week instead of 3.

Very interested to know your experience, and how it differs from mine.
Don't know the speeds but comparing an X7 with a z&f is like comparing a lada with an mercedes. Data from a x7 is very poor.
Riegl being the Rolls of scanners of course;-)
Reigl very impressive for data quality and range. But a bit on the pricey side
User avatar
landmeterbeuckx
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 1063
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 5:19 pm
9
Full Name: Lieven Beuckx
Company Details: Studiebureau Beuckx
Company Position Title: Owner
Country: Belgium
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Has thanked: 90 times
Been thanked: 253 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by landmeterbeuckx »

Formula1982 wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:18 pm
landmeterbeuckx wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:41 pm
Formula1982 wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:25 pm

Out of interest, why do you say the 5016 is ahead of other scanners on the market?
We trialled it when it was relatively new, was very impressed with it on a technical level but it was just too slow to be a viable upgrade compared to the competition. It still has the speed of scanners from 10 years ago. There are the RTC360 and Trimble X7 scanners which are both considerably faster, have great imagery and crisp, clean data, and I believe are cheaper. The auto registration I think is quicker and more reliable too, but maybe the software has improved in the past few years.

We used a 5016 last year on a project using a client's own scanner and were getting less than 20 scans per day. Around 15 minutes per position. If we had been using one of our RTC360's for the same job and same deliverable we'd have done the job in 1 week instead of 3.

Very interested to know your experience, and how it differs from mine.
Don't know the speeds but comparing an X7 with a z&f is like comparing a lada with an mercedes. Data from a x7 is very poor.
Riegl being the Rolls of scanners of course;-)
Reigl very impressive for data quality and range. But a bit on the pricey side
When i bought mine i also had quotes from z&f and others and z&f was more expensive.
LSBbvba
Surveying services - 3D Laserscanning
Tel : +32477753126
www.lsbbvba.be
[email protected]
RJGEOMATICS
Forum Supporter
Forum Supporter
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2019 7:20 pm
2
Full Name: Bart Man
Company Details: Laser Scanning
Company Position Title: Passionate about making amazing PCs
Country: Canada
Linkedin Profile: No
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 62 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by RJGEOMATICS »

Formula1982 wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:16 pm
MagicBrou wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:46 pm
landmeterbeuckx wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:41 pm
Don't know the speeds but comparing an X7 with a z&f is like comparing a lada with an mercedes. Data from a x7 is very poor.
Riegl being the Rolls of scanners of course;-)
totally right, you just need to compare the noise of the x7 and the poor range of 70m.... and then you know how worth it is to have a riegl or z+f :]...
Good point, the range isn't as much and the data isn't as clean. But this sort of scanner is usually used (or at least for us) for building up a network of 360 degree scans at short range. Most target objects are within 20m. So in reality any range past about 50m is in most case not much benefit, just nice. If we wanted to scan something at a distance, we'd use something built more for that sort of longer range scanning like a SX10 or P50. And if the data is clean enough, then more clean is nicer, but not worth waiting 15 minutes for when the X7 will be on to it's 3rd or 4th scan by the time the 5016 is completing it's 1st. The RTC360 has a range of 130m, and would be on to it's 5th scan by the time the 5016 was still on it's 1st.

To me, the 5016 has a weird place in the market. If you want a long range scanner, I'd go Reigl or P50. If you want an accurate, clean data, I'd go Surphaser. If you want to do 'area' scanning with 360's, I'd go RTC360. If you want on-site registration, I'd go X7.
So as an all-rounder, it hits more marks than any other. But it's a jack of all trades and master of none. Do many people want an all-rounder these days which is always at a disadvantage to the other guy who has the right tool for the element which is of most concern, whether it's speed, accuracy, range? It doesn't seem to have a niche in the market, except for someone who only wants to buy a single scanner they can do lots of different jobs with. But to me, that's like a tradesman opening the back of their van to reveal that they only own a leatherman multi-tool.

When I've used it, I've been very impressed with the tech but just couldn't see where it would fit 'on the shelf' for a specific use case. And it's not cheap either. Would love to hear how other people have used it and found it to be the right tool for the job.
You make some great points. And the kit I like to run, is an old C10 for Dual Compensated very clean and accurate PointClouds. Then you have a BLK360, or RTC360 for infill with the photos. Use the superior pointcloud quality of the C10 to control the less favorable BLK360 and RTC360 PointClouds, but you get quick imagery from both the BLK360 and RTC360.

I know, I know. The Leica C10 is a decade old. Yes True. But is still some the cleanest data out there. A little slower, but if you utilize it for your mass skeleton control, while capturing BLK360 stations for infill and color photos, you get 2 scanners that can be split and sent on separate missions, or work together. If you can justify the daily hire rates and capital costs then the RTC360 always is a nice piece of kit.

The BLK360 being part of a scanning operation, is always nice as it has inbuilt flash, IR, plus HDR. The PointClouds are not the quality of a C10 or P Series. But when managed correctly are not that poor and can service many industries. Unfortunately the BLK360 like the Faro scanners, does not have a sealed mirror. Also the BLK360, really does not like scanning black surfaces. But you have the unique ability of hosting the scans on Matterport, and also the inbuilt IR plus Flash are little features that not many scanners have.

The P40 is the nice middle ground, unfortunately the photos take a very long time. However you can drastically decrease photo time, by manually setting the exposure, instead of leaving it on automatic. Just buy a good light meter and become familiar with exposure settings etc. If you want a leatherman that is really good the closest thing to a leatherman, or as I call it a Unicorn is a Leica P40. But as I always say, there is no Unicorn scanner on the market. Also if you buy a P40 you can always pay for the Unlock to make it into a P50 later on, should you need.

Also all that being said, Scanners really do not make great photos. If you are trying to capture both Photos and Scanning, and the Photos are supposed to be of somewhat reasonable quality, you really can't space your scan stations, anymore than 3 meters.
User avatar
Peyman Bashiri
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 366
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:32 pm
12
Full Name: Peyman Bashiri
Company Details: Aero Geometrics Canadian Z+F reseller
Company Position Title: Laser scanning and BIM Specialist
Country: Canada
Skype Name: pbashiri2003
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Location: Vancouver,BC
Has thanked: 22 times
Been thanked: 23 times
Contact:

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by Peyman Bashiri »

I used 5016 since it was introduced to the market in many different situations and like many other scanners it has some minor issues that was solved one at a time. For example ours couldn't receive any points from the building roof or it was a bit loud when operate in buildings. I attached a youtube link of the 2021 model with less noise. But there are several features like the compensator or integrated LED light and the Scout software is really useful. The HDR camera also gives a very sharp panoramas as well.


youtu.be/lzicycdRN2U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzicycdRN2U

Peyman
pmalatzky
I have made 30-40 posts
I have made 30-40 posts
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:19 am
4
Full Name: Paul Malatzky
Company Details: Point Share Plus
Company Position Title: CEO
Country: Australia
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by pmalatzky »



We used a 5016 last year on a project using a client's own scanner and were getting less than 20 scans per day. Around 15 minutes per position. If we had been using one of our RTC360's for the same job and same deliverable we'd have done the job in 1 week instead of 3.
Interested to know what settings you were using that limited you to ~20 scans per day.

The IMAGER 5016 is highly configurable.
User avatar
landmeterbeuckx
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 1063
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 5:19 pm
9
Full Name: Lieven Beuckx
Company Details: Studiebureau Beuckx
Company Position Title: Owner
Country: Belgium
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Has thanked: 90 times
Been thanked: 253 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by landmeterbeuckx »

Found this datasheet.

The 15 minutes per scan is for ultra high resolution. Guess the standard time for a "normal" scan is 4 minutes.

https://positics.fr/wp-content/uploads/ ... niques.pdf
LSBbvba
Surveying services - 3D Laserscanning
Tel : +32477753126
www.lsbbvba.be
[email protected]
pmalatzky
I have made 30-40 posts
I have made 30-40 posts
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:19 am
4
Full Name: Paul Malatzky
Company Details: Point Share Plus
Company Position Title: CEO
Country: Australia
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by pmalatzky »

landmeterbeuckx wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:48 am
The 15 minutes per scan is for ultra high resolution. Guess the standard time for a "normal" scan is 4 minutes.
Super High and Ultra High are only recommended for selection scans.

And you are correct Lieven, a "normal" scan is approx. 3-mins without images, and ~5-mins with HDR images. So even with images, you can comfortably achieve 8-10 scans/hour, not to mention the rather tiny raw file size :-)

If you're not interested in images >100 scans/day is easily achievable.
User avatar
landmeterbeuckx
V.I.P Member
V.I.P Member
Posts: 1063
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 5:19 pm
9
Full Name: Lieven Beuckx
Company Details: Studiebureau Beuckx
Company Position Title: Owner
Country: Belgium
Linkedin Profile: Yes
Has thanked: 90 times
Been thanked: 253 times

Re: New Z+F Imager

Post by landmeterbeuckx »

pmalatzky wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:59 am
landmeterbeuckx wrote: Thu Jul 29, 2021 7:48 am
The 15 minutes per scan is for ultra high resolution. Guess the standard time for a "normal" scan is 4 minutes.
Super High and Ultra High are only recommended for selection scans.

And you are correct Lieven, a "normal" scan is approx. 3-mins without images, and ~5-mins with HDR images. So even with images, you can comfortably achieve 8-10 scans/hour, not to mention the rather tiny raw file size :-)

If you're not interested in images >100 scans/day is easily achievable.
Now i must say that these numbers are low in today's competitive market. A 3 minute scan is something i use with my Riegl when doing heritage outside.
All other stuff is done with the 45 seconds and even 20 seconds (for indoor 2d plan and lod200) uses. This way i'm very productive. Wouldn't want to start a project with the knowledge after 8 hours i've only covered 100 scans.

With competition of mobile mapping gear i think these numbers (scan times per position) are really to be changed by future instruments.
A client doesn't care how long you're doing on a project, they just want to have the best result at the lowest price so speed is of very high importance here.
Just my 2cts.
LSBbvba
Surveying services - 3D Laserscanning
Tel : +32477753126
www.lsbbvba.be
[email protected]
Post Reply

Return to “Z+F”