On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 6:04:38 PM UTC+2, rickman wrote:> On 8/27/2014 5:39 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: > > > On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 10:43:46 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: > > >> On 8/27/2014 4:35 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:34:43 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >>> I have a Picoscope for close to 10 years now, works flawlessly > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Yeah, I've heard a lot of good things about the Picoscopes, but they are > > >> > > >> very pricey. I also don't recall them making a mixed signal scope, am I > > >> > > >> wrong? > > >> > > >> > > > Go to > > > > > > http://www.picotech.com/oscilloscope.html > > > > > > They have 2 mixed signal scopes. > > > > > > You can download the software and run it without a scope. It will run a sample waveform, so you can get the feeling for the controls and the features > > > > Yes, they have MSOs, but they are still pricey. $1,700 for a model with > > 200 MHz bandwidth. Hantek doesn't have a similar model, their top > > bandwidth is 60 MHz for a MSO, but that unit is only $400. The > > Picoscope 60 MHz model is over $1000. >Well, the Picoscope which has comparable spec to the Hantek is 160 USD... Cheers Klaus
Best Oscilloscope for $3k
Started by ●August 26, 2014
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
On 8/28/2014 3:51 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote:> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 6:04:38 PM UTC+2, rickman wrote: >> On 8/27/2014 5:39 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: >> >>> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 10:43:46 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: >> >>>> On 8/27/2014 4:35 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:34:43 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> I have a Picoscope for close to 10 years now, works flawlessly >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Yeah, I've heard a lot of good things about the Picoscopes, but they are >> >>>> >> >>>> very pricey. I also don't recall them making a mixed signal scope, am I >> >>>> >> >>>> wrong? >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> Go to >> >>> >> >>> http://www.picotech.com/oscilloscope.html >> >>> >> >>> They have 2 mixed signal scopes. >> >>> >> >>> You can download the software and run it without a scope. It will run a sample waveform, so you can get the feeling for the controls and the features >> >> >> >> Yes, they have MSOs, but they are still pricey. $1,700 for a model with >> >> 200 MHz bandwidth. Hantek doesn't have a similar model, their top >> >> bandwidth is 60 MHz for a MSO, but that unit is only $400. The >> >> Picoscope 60 MHz model is over $1000. >> > Well, the Picoscope which has comparable spec to the Hantek is 160 USD...Really? Which one is that? Which Pico model and which Hantek model? -- Rick
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
On Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:53:39 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote:> On 8/28/2014 3:51 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: > > > On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 6:04:38 PM UTC+2, rickman wrote: > > >> On 8/27/2014 5:39 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 10:43:46 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: > > >> > > >>>> On 8/27/2014 4:35 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>>> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:34:43 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>>> I have a Picoscope for close to 10 years now, works flawlessly > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> Yeah, I've heard a lot of good things about the Picoscopes, but they are > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> very pricey. I also don't recall them making a mixed signal scope, am I > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> wrong? > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>> Go to > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> http://www.picotech.com/oscilloscope.html > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> They have 2 mixed signal scopes. > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> You can download the software and run it without a scope. It will run a sample waveform, so you can get the feeling for the controls and the features > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Yes, they have MSOs, but they are still pricey. $1,700 for a model with > > >> > > >> 200 MHz bandwidth. Hantek doesn't have a similar model, their top > > >> > > >> bandwidth is 60 MHz for a MSO, but that unit is only $400. The > > >> > > >> Picoscope 60 MHz model is over $1000. > > >> > > > Well, the Picoscope which has comparable spec to the Hantek is 160 USD... > > > > Really? Which one is that? Which Pico model and which Hantek model? >Let me rewind it to your claim of 1000USD for a Picoscope: http://www.picotech.com/entry-level-oscilloscopes.html Picoscope 2200A, 50MHz, 460USD Compared to Hantek DSO5062B: http://www.circuitspecialists.com/digital-storage-oscilloscope-dso5062b.html The Picoscope has an arbitrary signal generator, the Hantek does not Cheers Klaus
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 13:07:10 -0700 (PDT) "John Miles, KE5FX" <jmiles@gmail.com> wrote in Message id: <2c1fb359-58df-4ea6-82d8-950ff1f56df8@googlegroups.com>:>> Jay (Who sold you your working one...) > >It's been great. I don't know if you saw my post on TekScopes, but I actually replaced your panel with a different one ( http://www.ke5fx.com/tds694_lcd2.jpg ). The image quality was fine before, but matching the scope's native 640x480 resolution made it look even better.Glad you're happy with it. I did see your thread about that on Tekscopes. I bookmarked the LCD you used for future reference. I still have one left of the panel I put in your scope; when I need more I'll probably buy the one you used as long as it's going in a higher-end unit, as it is more expensive and the margins on the lower-end models has become quite thin. The one I've been using is this one: http://www.ebay.com/itm/360725515609 It's half the cost for some reason...
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 12:04:28 -0700 John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in Message id: <fpasv913j6g84u6eq104g24jvgpafup6ka@4ax.com>:>On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 14:44:38 -0400, Phil Hobbs ><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: > >>On 08/26/2014 07:26 PM, John Miles, KE5FX wrote: >>> On Tuesday, August 26, 2014 3:58:50 PM UTC-7, Tim Williams wrote: >>>> "ChesterW" <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>>> >>>> news:Fu2Lv.84945$O13.31767@fx17.iad... >>>> >>>>> Dear Group, >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> I can finally afford a new oscilloscope to supplement my trusty >>>>> TEK >>>> >>>>> 465M. My budget is around $3k. I like the newer Agilent scopes, >>>>> which I >>>> >>>>> have used when someone else was paying. I do mostly low >>>>> frequency >>>> >>>>> high-precision instruments (analog signals less than about 1 >>>>> MHz). >> >>>> >>>>> The pretty lower-end Agilent scopes are in reach, but I'm >>>>> tempted to use one of these: >>>>> >>>>> http://tinyurl.com/k88x74r >>>>> >>>> >>>>> which is driven internally with an FPGA and one of these ADCs >>>>> http://www.mouser.com/catalog/specsheets/DataSheetASD5020HS_v2.0.pdf >>>>> >>>>> >>I make out the ENOB to be 11.6 bits at 125 MSPS with 14 bit samples >>>>> using 4 channels, and 13.2 bits with 16 bit samples at 62.5 MSPS >>>>> using one channel. It will also go out to 1 GSPS with 8 bit >>>>> samples. Analog BW is 200 MHz. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> I like the serial decoding for free and the ability to stream >>>>> data to an external application for creating custom processing. >>>>> I'm thinking this would be good for prototyping AFEs with signal >>>>> processing via the PC. >>>> >>>>> So my thinking is that using this rather obscure configurable ADC >>>>> that these guys improve performance over the big manufacturers >>>>> ASICs for my particular applications niche. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> ChesterW >>>> >>>>> >>> >>> At the $3K level he will be (or should be) looking at an Agilent >>> DSO2000-X or DSO3000-X series, or one of the lower-end DSO6000A >>> series, not one of the rebadged Rigols. He should buy a gently used >>> one on eBay if necessary to meet the budget. It is worth it. >>> Agilent has beaten everybody else's DSOs to a bloody pulp over the >>> last few years. >>> >>> Re: NeonJohn's comment, he's spot on. A USB oscilloscope is like a >>> USB handgun. (And I say this as a designer of USB test gear. >>> Headless instrumentation can be great, but not for something as >>> fundamental as an oscilloscope or DMM.) >>> >>> Re: Phil's comment, I like my 694C immensely, but every time I turn >>> it on I have to wonder if this is the last day on the job for its >>> trigger chip. Also, the probes can be stupidly expensive. I don't >>> think the 694C (or any 50-ohm only scope) is a good choice for a >>> general purpose bench tool. It's better as a pinch hitter for a >>> newer, slower DSO. >> >>My 694C is actually a pre-production model that an old Tek guy upgraded >>with a brand-new CRT and a few options. If the trigger chip hasn't died >>yet, I'm not too worried. And I have a bunch of FET probes (P6201 1.1 >>GHz and P6249 4-GHz), so the 50-ohm input isn't an issue unless I were >>to turn the offset pot on the P6201 too far and roast the termination >>resistor in the scope front end. A trap for young players, for sure. >> >>If the OP needs the mixed-domain capability, then I agree that the >>newish ones are best, but you can get a 4-channel, 500 MHz digital scope >>for way under $1k on eBay--my last one was $465, and works brilliantly. >> >>Cheers >> >>Phil Hobbs > >We have the 1 GHz Rigol, and it's a great scope. The screen is >home-theatre size. > >https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Gear/Rigol/Rigol_1GHz.JPGI hate scopes that don't have separate controls for vertical amplitude and position. (But I'll sell them till the cows come home...)
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
John Larkin wrote:> We have the 1 GHz Rigol, and it's a great scope. The screen is > home-theatre size.The manufacturer says it costs 9k6$, not 3... Best regards, Piotr
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 16:14:57 +0200, Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> wrote:>John Larkin wrote: > >> We have the 1 GHz Rigol, and it's a great scope. The screen is >> home-theatre size. > >The manufacturer says it costs 9k6$, not 3... > > Best regards, PiotrSure. It's a better scope, for less money, than the Keygilent. A $350 Rigol is all the oscilloscope that most people ever need.
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
On 8/28/2014 5:20 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote:> On Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:53:39 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: >> On 8/28/2014 3:51 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: >> >>> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 6:04:38 PM UTC+2, rickman wrote: >> >>>> On 8/27/2014 5:39 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 10:43:46 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>>> On 8/27/2014 4:35 AM, Klaus Kragelund wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 1:34:43 AM UTC+2, rickman wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>>> I have a Picoscope for close to 10 years now, works flawlessly >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> Yeah, I've heard a lot of good things about the Picoscopes, but they are >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> very pricey. I also don't recall them making a mixed signal scope, am I >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> wrong? >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> Go to >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> http://www.picotech.com/oscilloscope.html >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> They have 2 mixed signal scopes. >> >>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> You can download the software and run it without a scope. It will run a sample waveform, so you can get the feeling for the controls and the features >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Yes, they have MSOs, but they are still pricey. $1,700 for a model with >> >>>> >> >>>> 200 MHz bandwidth. Hantek doesn't have a similar model, their top >> >>>> >> >>>> bandwidth is 60 MHz for a MSO, but that unit is only $400. The >> >>>> >> >>>> Picoscope 60 MHz model is over $1000. >> >>>> >> >>> Well, the Picoscope which has comparable spec to the Hantek is 160 USD... >> >> >> >> Really? Which one is that? Which Pico model and which Hantek model? >> > > Let me rewind it to your claim of 1000USD for a Picoscope: > > http://www.picotech.com/entry-level-oscilloscopes.html > > Picoscope 2200A, 50MHz, 460USD > > Compared to Hantek DSO5062B: > > http://www.circuitspecialists.com/digital-storage-oscilloscope-dso5062b.html > > The Picoscope has an arbitrary signal generator, the Hantek does notOk, that's great, but not what I was comparing because I am looking for a MSO. That is why the Pico weighs in at $1000. -- Rick
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:21:13 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> wrote:> On 8/26/14, 1:00 PM, Neon John wrote: >> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 11:21:57 -0500, ChesterW <iamsnoozin@yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> ChesterW >> >> I think that you ought to buy a cheaper PC-based scope first to see if >> you can stand the lack of knobs. Several years ago I bought a Link >> combination scope and logic analyzer. About $2k at the time. I grew >> to hate that thing with a passion. Almost everything required one to >> use both hands. And unlike a conventional scope where you know by >> feel which knob and switch does what, you have to take your eyes off >> what you're doing to make any adjustments. I ended up dumping it for >> a pittance on sleazebay.> You guys are right. From using a (cheap) USB scope before, the lack of > knobs is a real PITA. For this USB thing I'd make a box with some > encoders and buttons to emulate a USB keyboard. The supplied software > allows mapping keystrokes to the important functions, so at least I'll > be able to have basic controls without using the mouse.Depending on your soldering skills ( and/or whether you know someone who does who owes you a big favor ): A USB Connected Box-o-Encoders http://hackaday.com/2014/02/04/a-usb-connected-box-o-encoders/ "[Colin] loves his PicoScope, a USB based “headless” oscilloscope. While using it he found himself longing for a classic oscilloscope interface. Mouse clicks just weren’t a replacement for grabbing a dial and twisting it. ... " Enjoy... Frank McKenney -- The overwhelming message taught in American schools, public and private, is that no group is superior to any other. In America, embracing yourself as you are -- feeling secure about yourself -- is supposed to be the key to a successful life. People who don't live in the present are missing out on happiness and life itself. Whatever kernels of truth may underlie these propositions, the irony is this: America still rewards people who don't buy into them with wealth, prestige, and power. -- Amy Chua, Jed Rubenfeld / The Triple Package -- Frank McKenney, McKenney Associates Richmond, Virginia / (804) 320-4887 Munged E-mail: frank uscore mckenney aatt mindspring ddoott com
Reply by ●August 28, 20142014-08-28
On Tuesday, August 26, 2014 12:21:57 PM UTC-4, ChesterW wrote:> Dear Group, > > > > I can finally afford a new oscilloscope to supplement my trusty > > TEK 465M. My budget is around $3k. I like the newer Agilent scopes, > > which I have used when someone else was paying. I do mostly low > > frequency high-precision instruments (analog signals less than about 1 > > MHz). > > > > The pretty lower-end Agilent scopes are in reach, but I'm tempted > > to use one of these: > > > > http://tinyurl.com/k88x74r > > > > which is driven internally with an FPGA and one of these ADCs: > > > > http://www.mouser.com/catalog/specsheets/DataSheetASD5020HS_v2.0.pdf > > > > I make out the ENOB to be 11.6 bits at 125 MSPS with 14 bit samples > > using 4 channels, and 13.2 bits with 16 bit samples at 62.5 MSPS using > > one channel. It will also go out to 1 GSPS with 8 bit samples. Analog BW > > is 200 MHz. > > > > I like the serial decoding for free and the ability to stream data to an > > external application for creating custom processing. I'm thinking this > > would be good for prototyping AFEs with signal processing via the PC. > > > > So my thinking is that using this rather obscure configurable ADC that > > these guys improve performance over the big manufacturers ASICs for my > > particular applications niche. > > > > What do you think? > > > > ChesterWHave you looked at LeCroy. I haven't used one since the old orange trace ones. The new ones look nice and have a lot of features. The low end WaveSurfer 3000 Oscilloscopes run about 3K. I'm curious if someone has played with one. 200 MHz, 350 MHz, 500 MHz bandwidths Long Memory - up to 10 Mpts/Ch 10.1" touch screen display WaveScan - Advanced Search and Find LabNotebook Documentation Tool History Mode - Waveform Playback Serial Data Trigger and Decode 16 Digital Channels with 500 MS/s Sample Rate WaveSource Function Generator Mixed Signal Debug Capabilities Analog and Digital Cross Pattern Triggering Digital Pattern Search and Find Analog and Digital Timing Measurements Activity Indicators http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopeseries.aspx?mseries=466
