QField vs Survey123 for offline community data

We’re mapping tenant hazards and urban heat with volunteers in South LA, many on low-end Androids and no signal, so we need reliable offline capture, bilingual forms, and easy photo/audio attachments. If you’ve run both QField (QGIS 3.34 with PostGIS) and Survey123 at volunteer scale (about 50 people in a 4-hour window), how did sync conflicts, data ownership, and costs play out for a small nonprofit focused on equity?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍‌⁠‌‍‍‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠‌‌⁠⁠‌⁠‌​‌‍⁠⁠‌⁠​​‌‍‍‌‌‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠‌⁠​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‍‍‌‌‌⁠‌​‍​‌‍‌​‌‍⁠⁠‌‍⁠​‌‍‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍⁠‍‌‍‍‍‌​⁠⁠​⁠​‍‌‌​‍​⁠​⁠‌‌‍​‌‍⁠​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​​

We ran 50+ volunteers in Watts: QField with one geopackage per team, preloaded MBTiles (about 250 MB), and UUIDs on features so we could append to PostGIS with zero conflicts; photos were smooth, audio was awkward in “no signal” zones. If you need slick bilingual + audio, Survey123’s XLSForm shines but you’ll pay in users/credits and data lives in AGOL (see https://doc.arcgis.com/en/survey123/create-surveys/xlsform-multilingual.htm); otherwise QField is cheaper and offline-proof — what matters more for you, audio or cost?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍‌⁠‌‍‍‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌​⁠‍‌‍​⁠‌​‍‌‌⁠‌‍​‍⁠‌​⁠‍‌​⁠‍​‌‌‍‍‌‍⁠‌‌‌​‌‌⁠​‍‌​‍‍​⁠‌‍‌‍‍‍​⁠​⁠‌‍​⁠​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

I’ve had better luck with Survey123 for bilingual labels and audio, but offline with volunteers only worked when we sideloaded small MMPKs (they’re bricks on low-end phones) and avoided per-user logins since named accounts add up fast; see https://doc.arcgis.com/en/survey123/browser/create-surveys/xlsform-multilingual.htm… On the QField side, a tiny tweak that paid off was setting the photo widget to downscale images and saving attachments to a relative folder, which kept merges to PostGIS quick later. If you need zero licensing friction, QField wins; if multilingual UX is paramount, Survey123’s XLSForm is smoother.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍‌⁠‌‍‍‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​​​⁠​⁠​⁠​​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​​‌⁠‌⁠‌‍⁠​‌⁠‌‍‌‌​‍​⁠‌‍‌‍⁠‌‌‍⁠​‌‍‍‍‌​⁠​‌‍‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‍‍‌‍⁠‍​⁠​​‌⁠​⁠​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​

Quick tip from a similar push: QField was smoothest with a related media table and a form constraint like ‘photo_count > 0’ plus a project variable for team_id; merging to PostGIS with ogr2ogr -append meant no conflicts and zero vendor costs — fewer Sunday-night tears. If you lean Survey123, @scarlett_wil81’s point on audio is spot on, but flip ‘Only add new records’ and cap image size to keep low-end phones happy; consider sideloaded VTPKs instead of MMPKs.

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌‍‌⁠‌‍‍‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠‌‍​⁠​‍​⁠​‌​⁠​​​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​‌​⁠​‌​⁠​​​⁠‌​​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​​‌‍‌‌​⁠‌‍‌‍‌‌‌‍‍​‌​​⁠‌​‍​‌‌‌​​⁠‌‍​⁠‍​‌​​⁠‌⁠‌⁠​⁠​⁠‌‌‌⁠​⁠‌⁠‌‌​​​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌​