What scope to choose ?

[hary]

Hi.

It's been time I want a first scope and I was ready to go for a Hantek DSO5072P at 210€.

But reading the last post about different scope, I had to consider getting the brand new 4 channels Rigol DS1054Z for 356€ instead !

The DS1054Z is so claimed to be the best at the moment, I'm a little confused.
Is it worthit to have 4 channels instead  of 2 ?
Does the Rigol DS1054Z have other features I should consider compared with the Hantek DSO5072P that could justify the 150€ difference in price ?

[minim]

I've actually been considering the DS1054Z myself but I can't decide if it's better to go down to the "E" series and get 100Mhz for the same price almost as the 50Mhz DS1054Z. The downside is the smaller screen of the E series tho.

I can't really help with your question since I'm clueless myself but looking forward to seeing what kind of replies you get on this since I'm eager to get my first scope myself

[phil]

Whatever you do, you do not want to buy a 1052E instead of a 1054Z. There is a huge tech difference between these two scopes and the ~60€ price difference does not justify buying the 1052E imho. Especially since you can "upgrade" the 1054Z to 100 MHz easily and get all the other goodies in the process, too.

4 channels are a very useful tool, even if you do not need them right away. You could, for example, use the scope for some small scale logic analysis. Or probe analog cicuits where you want to see input, output and some signals in the actual circuit.

A 2 channel can do the job, too. But it may require some thinking outside the box and sometimes a pretty deep understanding of whats going on. Take the logic analysis example: Your SPI bus is acting up and you want to know whats going on. A 4 channel scope can display clock and data and chip select lines. Thats all you need to find the problem.
On a 2 channel scope you can only see 2 of these signals and that means that you miss important data. You can, of course, probe the signals one after another and try to figure out where the problem is. And it will work eventually. But seeing all signals in question at once and how they are related will make it much easier as you can not only see the signals themselves but also their timing.

As you are a beginner, Id seriously recommend going for the 4 channels, you will not regret it.

//edit: The 1054Z has much more memory and a serial decode option. Thats worth considering, too!

-phil

[Vito_R]

Whatever you do, you do not want to buy a 1052E instead of a 1054Z. There is a huge tech difference between these two scopes and the ~60€ price difference does not justify buying the 1052E imho. Especially since you can "upgrade" the 1054Z to 100 MHz easily and get all the other goodies in the process, too.

Is it confirmed you can upgrade the 1054Z to 100Mhz? Where can someone find the hack? Is upgrading to 150Mhz also possible?

[phil]

There is a >40 pages topic in the test equipment subforum about this. Its the same hack thats been around for the other 1000Z scopes and, of course, it works.
The limit is 100MHz and you really do not want to go any higher with only 250Ms/s with 3 or 4 channels enabled.

-phil

[AG6QR]

Phil is right about four channels.  Being able to see four signals on the same screen lets you see the timing relationships among them, and that can be incredibly useful.

Another point to consider is the usefulness of intensity grading.  That can give a huge help in intuitively understanding what the signal is doing.

If you do any work with digital protocols, look at the total amount of long memory available.  The DS1054Z has 24MPoints, the DS1052E has 1MPoints.  I'm not sure, but I believe the Hantek has only 40K of memory.  Having lots of long memory available comes in handy if you want to record a long series of events with high resolution, and then zoom and pan back and forth to see the way different events happened at different times.  It's especially useful for something like debugging or reverse engineering a serial data link between two devices -- you can see how one device sends some information, and the other one responds, then the first one sends more info, etc., over an extended exchange.

[Vito_R]

There is a >40 pages topic in the test equipment subforum about this. Its the same hack thats been around for the other 1000Z scopes and, of course, it works.
The limit is 100MHz and you really do not want to go any higher with only 250Ms/s with 3 or 4 channels enabled.

-phil

Yah I heard about the hack for their other scopes but I assumed they would change the design or secure the firmware.  Seems like maybe they don't mind it because it's one of the reasons it makes their scopes very popular.  I might buy one and try it out.  Thanks

[minim]

Oh I thought the 100Mhz was not possible on the new scopes  Great news indeed even if I don't have a clue of why I would want 100Mhz

[phil]

100MHz is not that much actually. Its enough to do some reliable measurements up to 10MHz square waves, but a 20MHz or 30MHz square will already start to deteriorate with a 100MHz BW scope. The rule of thumb is that a scope should have 10x more BW than the non-sinusodial signals you want to accurately measure.

You can still see a 100MHz square wave on your 100MHz BW scope, but it will look like a sine wave and also lose a significant part of its amplitude. That means that you cannot measure things like rise/fall time and duty cycle or even anything amplitude related.

[hary]

My fisrt question was about considering the

Hantek DSO5072P at 210€
and the
Rigol DS1054Z at 356€

I understand the Rigol is much better but is also 150€ more expensive  !

[kripton2035]

depends on what you want to do with the scope
if you want to do any digital or logic work, then the rigol 1054 is the way to go
as the hantek does not have any serial decode option, and you need 4 channels to see SPI signals.
if you want to do any basic work, or analogic work then the hantek coud be enought
but frankly I would go to a used scope for that price it would be better than any low end new digital scope
except the ds1054 that really is a bargain, even without "upgrading" it for free.
it's your choice, buy a soon useless tool but that is cheaper than the other you could use for years ?

[rf-loop]

Also NOTEabout one important thing.

This Hantek P model have small sampling buffer, max 24k!
Rigol have 12M samples (optional 24M samples)

This is very important because it means totally slow samplerates with lower timebases.

If you compare (or roughly estimate) samplerates using different timebases you can see what is going on.

So, do not look only max samplerates. Look also samplerates in real life normal use with wide range different needs of scope



 

[george graves]

There is a >40 pages topic in the test equipment subforum about this. Its the same hack thats been around for the other 1000Z scopes and, of course, it works.
-phil

Just to be clear.  There is no hack for the Rigol DS1054Z.  Correct?

[oldway]

If you look at the video about reverse engineering of the front end preamplifiers, there seems to be a very easy way to hack this DS1054Z. (hardware hack)
http://www.eevblog.com/2014/10/22/eevblog-675-how-to-reverse-engineer-a-rigol-ds1054z/

As the bandwith limitation is done by switching of capacitors, if you remove all the transistors who are switching those caps, you would have full bandwith. (100 Mhz) without the need of a new firmware.
NB: not tested, I don't assume any responsability, make at your own risks.
http://www.eevblog.com/files/Rigol-DS1054Z-Schematic-DiffAmp.pdf

[phil]

There is a >40 pages topic in the test equipment subforum about this. Its the same hack thats been around for the other 1000Z scopes and, of course, it works.
-phil

Just to be clear.  There is no hack for the Rigol DS1054Z.  Correct?

There is no hack specific for the 1054Z. But there is a hack for all the 1000Z series scopes. Its not really a hack, it is a key gen that allows you to generate option keys.


Also: Take a look at daves review of the tekway 1102 (or whatever, its the same as the hantek). The front end seems to produce excessive rining, that is a complete show stopper for me. The UI is also not that great for me, but that is up to your personal taste.
 
-phil

[DanielS]

The 1054Z blows anything else money can buy for ~$400 out of the water. You will likely get far more useful life out of it than just about anything else on the market short of buying a used higher-end scope.

Once you get used to the extra freedom of having two extra channels, deep(er) memory and the other 1054Z features, I bet you will think it was well worth every extra buck; even more so after the keygen hack if you end up finding uses for the full 24Mpts memory, segmented memory and other unlockable features.

[rx8pilot]

I totally regret not getting a 4ch scope. I am looking at an upgrade as soon as I can afford one.

The new Keysight [Agilent] options look like they will keep me from blaming the bench gear.

[george graves]

There is no hack specific for the 1054Z. But there is a hack for all the 1000Z series scopes. Its not really a hack, it is a key gen that allows you to generate option keys.

HA!  Thanks for the info. That's great news.  Ya know....I watched the tear down video Dave did for the 1054Z, and he made zero mention of it being hackable IIRC - Doh!     FAIL!

[kripton2035]

as Dave gets a lot of materials for free from manufacturers for the teardown, it would not be good for them to tell it is hackable ...
at least it's on the forum.

[lapm]

as Dave gets a lot of materials for free from manufacturers for the teardown, it would not be good for them to tell it is hackable ...
at least it's on the forum.

But just about anything is hackable, its juts matter of effort and knoledge it takes. Good first step are these teardowns, you atlest know what hardware is cabable of...

[David Hess]

If you look at the video about reverse engineering of the front end preamplifiers, there seems to be a very easy way to hack this DS1054Z. (hardware hack)

As the bandwith limitation is done by switching of capacitors, if you remove all the transistors who are switching those caps, you would have full bandwith. (100 Mhz) without the need of a new firmware.

The filters which limit the bandwidth based on model number also almost certainly implement the 20 MHz bandwidth limit function (page 2-3 of the user manual) so if they are disabled, that would be lost as well.

[tggzzz]

Since you haven't specified what you want to measure, a perfectly reasonableand justifyable answer is "Tektronix 465 or HP1740".

[David Hess]

Since you haven't specified what you want to measure, a perfectly reasonableand justifyable answer is "Tektronix 465 or HP1740".

Even I would not go that far.  I have recommended oscilloscopes like the Tektronix 465 or HP1740 in the past but only if the user had or wanted experience in analog electronics and troubleshooting.  For general purpose use, most people are going to want something new which includes a warranty and is relatively trouble free.

Despite my misgiving about it, the Rigol DS1054Z is the minimum that I would recommend today although for different reasons than most people.

[Syntax_Error]

Since you haven't specified what you want to measure, a perfectly reasonableand justifyable answer is "Tektronix 465 or HP1740".

Even I would not go that far.  I have recommended oscilloscopes like the Tektronix 465 or HP1740 in the past but only if the user had or wanted experience in analog electronics and troubleshooting.  For general purpose use, most people are going to want something new which includes a warranty and is relatively trouble free.

Despite my misgiving about it, the Rigol DS1054Z is the minimum that I would recommend today although for different reasons than most people.

I have been interested in this scope for awhile now (the 1054Z) because of its specs/features and price point. Considering that as the minimum, what would you consider to be the next logical "step up" from the 1054Z, if one were to go up to "the next" price point? I realize this is only an opinion, and relies on many unspecified criteria/application information.

I'd be curious to know what the 1054Z leaves on the table. I'm well aware that multi-thousand dollar scopes are superior in every right, but I wouldn't think those to be the next level up. I would imagine there is something in between.

[David Hess]

Since you haven't specified what you want to measure, a perfectly reasonableand justifyable answer is "Tektronix 465 or HP1740".

Even I would not go that far.  I have recommended oscilloscopes like the Tektronix 465 or HP1740 in the past but only if the user had or wanted experience in analog electronics and troubleshooting.  For general purpose use, most people are going to want something new which includes a warranty and is relatively trouble free.

Despite my misgiving about it, the Rigol DS1054Z is the minimum that I would recommend today although for different reasons than most people.

I have been interested in this scope for awhile now (the 1054Z) because of its specs/features and price point. Considering that as the minimum, what would you consider to be the next logical "step up" from the 1054Z, if one were to go up to "the next" price point? I realize this is only an opinion, and relies on many unspecified criteria/application information.

What I mean is that I would not recommend a new oscilloscope which does not include some of the features found in the 1054Z like peak detection and maybe graded intensity.  Lack of peak detection and some other minor issues led me to avoid earlier Rigol oscilloscopes.

I'd be curious to know what the 1054Z leaves on the table. I'm well aware that multi-thousand dollar scopes are superior in every right, but I wouldn't think those to be the next level up. I would imagine there is something in between.

I have not given a lot of thought to what would be the next step better if only because as you point out, it is too dependent on the application.  The 1054Z covers general use pretty well.

As far as the 1054Z and cousins, I am dubious that their digital triggering and non-ETS operation can completely replace my older analog and digital oscilloscopes but this is not something I have had a chance to evaluate.