Transcript: "I Tested Two 3D Scanners: One Is Simply Better!" — CNC Kitchen

I honestly regret not making this video earlier because over the last two years, it wasn't necessarily the 3D printers that brought me the most joy. It was one engineering tool that I really wouldn't want to miss anymore, a good 3D scanner. The scanners you can get these days are able to capture anything from tiny parts like this float valve needle all the way to full-size vehicles with an amazing level of details. But are they all created equal? In today's video, we'll take a look at the Creality Raptor Pro and the Revopoint Metro Y Pro. Two scanners I've used quite a bit over the last year. And while one of them sparks a surprising amount of joy in me, the other one can be quite frustrating.

This video is sponsored by Fanttik and their E2 Ultra precision screwdriver and the F2 Master cordless rotary tool. Both scanners themselves were provided by their respective manufacturers (Creality, Revopoint) for review — this comparison video itself is not sponsored by either scanner manufacturer.

3D scanners have been around in industry for decades at a serious price tag; the presenter used a ~$150,000 system professionally for reverse engineering and QC. Modern laser-line scanners project bright laser lines onto a part and reconstruct shape from that, working well across dark plastics and machined metals, often without surface prep.

Two misconceptions addressed up front: (1) transparent/reflective/dark parts often need prep (scanning spray); (2) a 3D scan output is a mesh (like an STL), not an editable CAD step file — it's a "blueprint" to design around, not a replicable CAD part.

Both Creality and Revopoint have confusing, sprawling product lineups (Raptor / Raptor Pro / Raptor X / Scoon S1/X1/P1 for Creality; Metro X / Metro Y / Metro Y Pro / Metro Y Ultra for Revopoint). Both test units — Raptor Pro and Metro Y Pro — cost around $1,500.

Creality Raptor Pro: 3 modes — parallel line (highest detail, ~200mm working distance), crossline (22 lines, wider area, ~300mm distance, lower resolution), and structured-light infrared mode (markerless, best for people/art/sculptures, not technical parts).

Revopoint Metro Y Pro: 4 modes — parallel line (15 lines), crossline (34 lines), single-line laser (for deep holes — tested, no meaningfully better results than parallel mode), and full-field blue structured light (markerless). All three laser modes use the same ~250mm working distance, unlike Creality's distance-differentiated modes.

Both come in carrying cases. Raptor Pro: scanner, cable, power supply, marker sheets, rugged case. Metro Y Pro: same plus a full two-axis rotary table, tripod, battery handle, phone holder (wireless handheld capability included) — Creality's wireless handle is a separate $300 accessory ("scan bridge"). Metro Y's cable is 3m vs Raptor Pro's 2m; Raptor Pro uses an annoying screw-lock USB connector vs Metro Y's snap connector. Both include a glass calibration plate.

Both need a reasonably powerful PC/Mac (M3 MacBook and Ryzen 5800X3D+RTX3080 workstation both fine; underpowered travel laptop struggled). Calibration workflow is similar (QR code scan of the plate, then sweep at various angles); Creality's software gives clearer 3D-position guidance during calibration.

Test 1 — N64 controller shell (matte injection-molded plastic, good scanning contrast, deep pockets on the back): both scanners handled the matte front well. Loaded into Scan Ruler (presenter's own free/open-source scanning analysis tool) for comparison — overall geometry matched within ~±0.05mm, no significant scale difference. But Raptor Pro captured noticeably crisper detail (Nintendo logo lettering, injection-mold texture); Metro Y results were softer/smoother and exhibited "burr-like"/frayed artifacts around sharp edges, seen repeatedly across other scans too. Full-field mode resolution was notably worse than either laser-line mode on this part. Seam artifacts from merging multiple-orientation scans (a complaint from the presenter's video two years earlier) were much improved on both scanners now.

Accuracy claims: Creality rates 0.02mm + 0.08mm/meter; Revopoint rates 0.02mm + 0.04mm/meter (better on paper). Presenter built two custom "ball bar" references (precision ceramic spheres epoxied to carbon-fiber rod, ~250mm and ~150mm spacing) to test independently via Scan Ruler. Results: Raptor Pro mostly within ±0.02mm of reference (one measurement slightly out of spec); Metro Y within ±0.03mm (two measurements slightly out of spec) — Metro Y was more sensitive to scan settings, likely related to the frayed-edge artifacts.

Test 2 — tiny reflective brass Vespa carburetor float needle valve (no scanning spray): Raptor Pro handled it well even unprepared, capturing stamped markings. Metro Y initially captured nothing; needed laser-brightness tweaks to get usable results, and still missed fine detail. Contributing factor: Metro Y's minimum resolution setting is 0.15mm vs Raptor Pro's 0.07mm high-res mode.

Test 3 — Vespa carburetor + air filter (mixed rubber/matte metal/shiny metal/springs): Metro Y struggled with exposure across the reflective-metal/black-rubber contrast; Raptor Pro again captured more fine detail (text, springs) and handled mixed surfaces better without adjustment.

Test 4 — Vespa scooter front (large smooth sheet-metal, handheld scanning via magnetic markers + wireless handle setup): here the presenter gives a clear win to the Metro Y — smoother surfaces, more overall detail, better capture of the reflective Vespa logo. Both scans matched each other within ~0.1mm even at the extremities. One Metro Y weakness: leftover marker artifacts not cleanly removed from final data, seen on multiple parts.

Test 5 — human face/head scan (colleague "Mario," in lieu of the presenter's wife, previously scanned during pregnancy): Raptor Pro used an infrared feature-tracking mode (eyes could stay open, Face-ID-like), producing smooth natural results but struggling with hair (a common 3D-scanning problem generally). Metro Y required full-field mode with a bright LED projector (eyes had to be closed), and its people-scanning results were grainier with hair completely missing. Creality explicitly markets Raptor for people-scanning; Revopoint does not, so the comparison is somewhat apples-to-oranges, but the presenter states Raptor is clearly the better choice for scanning people.

Overall verdict: both are good engineering tools at similar $1,500 price points. Revopoint Metro Y Pro gives more included accessories (rotary table, battery handle) for the money. Creality Raptor Pro delivers sharper, crisper results on smaller/technical parts with less settings-tweaking; accuracy is roughly comparable between the two overall. The deciding factor is usability/software: Revopoint's software has a persistent, version-independent input lag (mouse/scanner-movement-to-screen delay) across every computer tested (Mac and Windows, CPU and GPU-accelerated), described as feeling like "playing a game through a bad emulator." Revopoint's processing is also slower and the software crashes more. Creality's software, despite the brand's historically weaker software reputation, is smooth and responsive by comparison. Net recommendation: the presenter would currently pick the Creality Raptor Pro (or even the base Raptor) over the Metro Y Pro, primarily on usability grounds, despite Revopoint's better included-accessories value.

Presenter closes with a reminder that 3D scanners are not for everyone — understand what a scan output actually is (mesh/blueprint, not editable CAD) before buying — and invites viewer experiences and requests for future scanner reviews.