Does anyone have any experience with these and care to give a review on them?
I can't answer your question directly, but...
Geomax is part of Hexagon, which also includes Leica. I don't know if there is any sharing of information/technology between them.
Comments about digital levels in general...I have used a Leica (early model in the early 90's) and Zeiss/Trimble (2005 to the present), I also used a Topcon digital level one time (bad experience...it gave a totally bogus reading on one shot that was right at the top of the rod, in error by decimeters). My experience with the Leica was that the standard fiberglass rod needed to be replaced every year or so because of wear in the joints. I have had the same Zeiss 4 m rod for 12 years now, no problem. I still get excellent results with that rod. I also have three 3 m invar rods (with struts) and access to two 2 m invar rods (no struts), and a 1 m fiberglass rod (for leveling to gages) and a 0.50 m invar strip (for marks set vertical)
My original Zeiss Dini 12 was smashed in a door on a dam, replaced by the Trimble Dini 12. Great results are obtained with this instrument, we run a LOT of second order levels, both bluebooked (i.e. submitted to NGS) and non-bluebooked. I have two complaints, though. Both relate to the fact that it seems as if Trimble does not put any R&D into the digital level at all. First, the instrument is very much affected by sunlight/shadows. I realize it is basically a camera, but you would think after this many years of the same model they would have improved that. We have improvised by putting a fancy sunshade over the scope (Styrofoam coffee cup), but still there are issues in bright sunlight. Ideal digital level weather is a 100% overcast day. The second issue is that they have not changed the very limited data format either. When memory was costly, I could see the problem. Now that memory is extremely cheap, they need a new internal data format that has more flexibility. Even better would be a BT connection to an app on a handheld that would control the level.
The Geomax level mentioned is quite affordable, I can see no reason why anyone who does any amount of leveling would not have some type of digital level.
John Hamilton, post: 438536, member: 640 wrote: Geomax is part of Hexagon, which also includes Leica. I don't know if there is any sharing of information/technology between them.
It may not walk or quack like a duck; but it sure looks like one....
Pretty much answers that question.
On Geomax in general...for a lot of surveyors that do mostly boundary and residential land development/construction work, the technology level of the Geomax equipment is really all they need.
I was talking to a Leica employee a few weeks ago and there sees to be a general level of discomfort that their parent company is, for all intents and purposes, competing with them.
My GeoMax Zoom80 is indistinguishable from a Leica TCRP1202 save for it's color. Part numbers are different, but follow the Leica convention. I have little doubt that it was born in a Swiss factory.
Jim Frame, post: 438554, member: 10 wrote: My GeoMax Zoom80 is indistinguishable from a Leica TCRP1202 save for it's color. Part numbers are different, but follow the Leica convention. I have little doubt that it was born in a Swiss factory.
Leica has a factory in Singapore. I toured it when I was working in Indonesia around the turn of the century.
tomarneson, post: 438624, member: 864 wrote: Leica has a factory in Singapore.
Accordingly, I revise my earlier statement as follows: I have little doubt that it was born in a Leica factory or functional facsimile thereof.
