Multimeter Review: Agilent U1272A

[mjlorton]

Have a look at this video and see what you think?

I think that I don't like the Agilent. If you consider ergonomics or human usability, a digital display should not update more frequently than the eye and brain can absorb the numbers. Practically speaking, this means the display should freeze the current reading for at least a quarter of a second before moving on to the next reading. Any faster than this and you tend to see a blur--any advantage is lost.

Of course the bar graph is different. This is an "analog" display, and it should update as close to real time as the display permits before burring occurs. Obviously a better LCD display with fast pixel response and low persistence would be ideal here. Those ancient slow displays with long persistence are no good at all. They have long since been abandoned on computer or smartphone displays.

Getting back to the display of numerical readings, the ideal situation would be to show three numbers on the display. Every quarter of a second the display should update to show the average over the previous quarter of a second, but simultaneously it should show the high and low values instantaneously measured over that same quarter of a second. The spread of the high and low would give you a measure of the noise, fluctuation or uncertainty on the signal.

This is an interesting situation in that I don't think my ideal meter exists out there at any price point. The Fluke 289 has some nice features, but it is way too big and has that horribly inconvenient soft menu system. Not to mention the appetite for batteries. The Fluke 87V is old technology and is overpriced for what it offers. The Agilent is interesting, but not quite there yet. The designers have built a few too many usability flaws into it. I wonder if the U1251B is any better?

Ian,

You raise good valid and sensible points about the display. My ears prick up when you mention "my ideal meter"....as I recall Dave started a series on an ideal open multimeter design....I was excited to see what would transpire but I'm not sure Dave posted any more on the subject.

Cheers,
Martin.

[EEVblog]

You raise good valid and sensible points about the display. My ears prick up when you mention "my ideal meter"....as I recall Dave started a series on an ideal open multimeter design....I was excited to see what would transpire but I'm not sure Dave posted any more on the subject.

It wasn't my "ideal" multimeter, as such a thing doesn't exist. It was just different.
Sometime you want the magnificence of the OLED display on the Agilents, or that super fast screen updating. Other times you want slow updating and a huge contrast reflective displays. You lust after <0.01% for everything, yet want 800 hours of battery life. Some time you want all the bells and whistles, whilst other times to just scream for the simplicity of meter that just measures Volts, Ohms and Amps without fuss.
You want the compactness of an EX330, but also want it to have massive HRC fuses and MOV's and survive a nuclear strike.
Every meter is a tradeoff.

Dave.

[nanofrog]

It's too bad that Fluke/Danaher own Pomona now - HP/Agilent used to get their probes from them and they are definitely better than the Chinese probes included with Agilent kit now.

Perhaps Probemaster would be a reasonable alternative.

[robrenz]

Perhaps Probemaster would be a reasonable alternative.

Even though Fluke/Danaher own Pomona now, Pomona products are still available separately.

[nanofrog]

Perhaps Probemaster would be a reasonable alternative.

Even though Fluke/Danaher own Pomona now, Pomona products are still available separately.

My comment was based on the presumption that Agilent wouldn't want to use Pomona in order to both further differentiate their products from Fluke (visually), as well as not contributing funds to Danaher's bottom line. 

[robrenz]

[My comment was based on the presumption that Agilent wouldn't want to use Pomona in order to both further differentiate their products from Fluke (visually), as well as not contributing funds to Danaher's bottom line. 

Sorry my bad,  I wasn't thinking about alternatives from Agilents point of view. I was thinking of user replacements.

[nanofrog]

[My comment was based on the presumption that Agilent wouldn't want to use Pomona in order to both further differentiate their products from Fluke (visually), as well as not contributing funds to Danaher's bottom line. 

Sorry my bad,  I wasn't thinking about alternatives from Agilents point of view. I was thinking of user replacements.

Makes sense, but it would be nice if the included lead set didn't need "replacing" to begin with  , just adding whatever the user needs to go with them if necessary IMO.

Probemaster's 8043S kit is very similar to Agilent's U1169A lead set in terms of price, but includes a bit more (bit cheaper too, and much cheaper than the U1168A which is closer in in what it contains = alligator clips, SMT probes, and a set of hooks). SMT probes and one extra hook vs 8043S kit for a bit more than double the money (USD prices). Combine that with lower quality (probes and strain reliefs), I can't help but feel Agilent pinched a couple of pennies too many. 

[saturation]

The main lead set that came with several of my 1272a and the 1252a were top quality; however the accessory lead sets are low quality, Extech style PVC type.  A key item to look for is silicone rubber insulation in the items, its more expensive and more comfortable to use, most Fluke accessory or Pomona leads are this type, and 5-10x cost of a PVC version.  Given that, even Extech branded silicone leads are better than many Agilent ones, although they are all rated for safety and proper voltage, its just a matter of ergonomics.

[grenert]

I have some of the Probemaster 8000 series leads and they are indeed very nice (on par with Fluke, IMO).  Note that they have a somewhat unusual grip, which I personally like, but is more rounded than Fluke/Pomona.  The leads are thinner and more flexible than the Agilent ones.  Saturation, I think the Agilent leads are of good quality, too, but the thickness makes them bulkier and less flexible than I'd like.  And that bright cherry red color that Agilent uses looks toy-like!    Completely agree with your assessment of the accessory leads/tips.  I can't ding them too much for that, however: Most other manufacturers don't include any extra accessories at all!

On a bit of a tangent here, but I am annoyed that Fluke no longer offers straight-plug leads.  I find it ridiculous that they supply their bench meters with leads that have right-angle plugs.   

[EEVblog]

Hi,
Great videos indeed both of them.
I see most of the feedback is from "pro" Fluke users, as an everyday DMM user and a Fluke user I would like to say that Fluke has to up their game. Agilent just made a remarkably good meter. If the only bad thing about it is the probes and how fast it actualizes the display so what? can we actually read and write that fast? When was the last time someone needed to record measurements of that accuracy? We all know here that electronics measurements are never exacts, passive components have tolerances, then temperature, noise, etc... Plus if I was in the need to get that kind of reading I would use the average function.
Don't get me wrong, I see that feedback very useful, but in saying that, would I buy a 87V over a U1272A today, probably not so far I haven't been convinced that spending the extra money for a 87V is worth it. The 87V look old, the display isn't as clear and is quite small. Agilent is very competitive, what meter today matches its performance with its price? I think Fluke are living on their reputation and that's fine, but it is very good to see that Agilent is having a go at them and to be fair they are on the right track.

FYI, my long overdue review of the U1272A is rendering now, so should be up by tomorrow.

Yes, it's hard to fault the Agilent. Bang-for-buck it just trumps the 87-V.
The only places the 87V was superior was audible continuity speed, screen size and contrast, the High-Z input mode on mV, and of course the "trust" things built up over 20 years in that model.
The Agilent still has firmware issues, it locked up on me during the review.
And it had an issue with input overload recovery on the ohms range.
Oh yeah, I didn't like the probes much either.

But the Agilent things can be fixed with firmware mostly, so really, unless it has long term issues that haven't surfaced yet, it's a bit of a no-brainer choice, unless you lust after the Fluke because, well, it's a Fluke.

Dave.

[EEVblog]

Here is my initial review of the U1272A.
* Continuity tester: Very good

If you use the visual alert, yes, very good.
If you need good audible continuity then I'd rate it as barely adequate.
Hopefully they'll fix this with a firmware patch.

Dave.

[ejeffrey]

the High-Z input mode on mV, and of course the "trust" things built up over 20 years in that model.

Out of curiosity, how often do you take advantage of the high-Z mV mode, and for what?  I understand the advantages and I know is relatively easy to implement, but I wonder how often people actually use it.

[EEVblog]

Out of curiosity, how often do you take advantage of the high-Z mV mode, and for what?  I understand the advantages and I know is relatively easy to implement, but I wonder how often people actually use it.

I've used it quite a few times to measure high impedance sensors and things like that.
In general electronics use, it is not an often used feature though.
But as always, when you need it, you need it.

Dave.

[mjlorton]

Here is my initial review of the U1272A.
* Continuity tester: Very good

If you use the visual alert, yes, very good.
If you need good audible continuity then I'd rate it as barely adequate.
Hopefully they'll fix this with a firmware patch.

Dave.

Yes, agreed. Good point about being able to fix many of the issues with firmware...that's a biggie.

[saturation]

Some pointed out elsewhere that the Agilent DMM rebates are still valid until April, 2012.

For the 1272a, that's $100 off the list price, so the final price is between $270-300.  This certainly makes it far more attractive than a Fluke 87V, assuming they are nearly equal in functionality and reliability.

http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/editorial.jspx?cc=US&lc=eng&ckey=2060152&id=2060152&cmpid=zzfindhhcashback

If Fluke were to reduce the 87V list price to e.g. ~$200, it would be more cost effective and give the Agilent tough competition, except if you absolutely need functions only the 1272a can deliver. 

[mjlorton]

In this video I show a comparison between the smoothing feature (smooth mode) on both the Fluke 87 V and the Agilent U1272A.

In both these multimeters the feature is enabled as a "power-on" option / feature. The Agilent does allow some configuration and enabling of this feature in the setup / menu system.



Cheers,
Martin.

[Adrien]

FYI, my long overdue review of the U1272A is rendering now, so should be up by tomorrow.

Yes, it's hard to fault the Agilent. Bang-for-buck it just trumps the 87-V.
The only places the 87V was superior was audible continuity speed, screen size and contrast, the High-Z input mode on mV, and of course the "trust" things built up over 20 years in that model.
The Agilent still has firmware issues, it locked up on me during the review.
And it had an issue with input overload recovery on the ohms range.
Oh yeah, I didn't like the probes much either.

But the Agilent things can be fixed with firmware mostly, so really, unless it has long term issues that haven't surfaced yet, it's a bit of a no-brainer choice, unless you lust after the Fluke because, well, it's a Fluke.

Indeed Dave,

I have watched your videos, the tear down and the test were the Agilent failed. I was also very happy with your reply to that video that Agilent actally cared about user reviews. They took it seriously and (hopefully) fixed the bugs with firmware v2.0. It was interesting to see that Fluke took much longer to come back with a solution to their problem with the 87V.
The really good thing, I think, about what Agilent is doing today is providing us with a different option when it come to buy a well made DMM. Fluke use to have the monopol now it would be good to see what they do.

If you use the visual alert, yes, very good.
If you need good audible continuity then I'd rate it as barely adequate.
Hopefully they'll fix this with a firmware patch.

Here I kind of agree Dave, in the lab yes we need perhaps a better more audible continuity beeper. but the Agilent guys have come up with a great idea with the Light Alert. Out on the field, especially in busy factories its is a must to have I would say.
The test done earlier on the comparison between the 287, 87V and the U1272A showed that the Agilent was a bit slower but again I would need to confirm that when I get it. Well I reckon that the light is faster than the beeper for the Agilent.

But at the end of the day, if you only trust Fluke you won't buy Agilent. I am against the fact that Fluke should be the only choice and for that I am willing to buy the Agilent. I think that what Agilent is doing today could on the long term drive DMM prices down and pushes manufacturers to release better models more often.


Adrien

[robrenz]

Martin,

Is it possible that even though the smooth annuciator was still showing after your changes, that you might need to shut the meter off and re-enter the smooth mode for the settings to take effect?

[EEVblog]

Some pointed out elsewhere that the Agilent DMM rebates are still valid until April, 2012.

For the 1272a, that's $100 off the list price, so the final price is between $270-300.  This certainly makes it far more attractive than a Fluke 87V, assuming they are nearly equal in functionality and reliability.

They aren't equivalent in functionality of course, the Agilent beats the pants off the Fluke.
In some ways it's not even a fair comparison, as I tend to divide meters into data-logging and non-datalogging, but they are a similar price, and Agilent directly push it against the 87V.

If Fluke were to reduce the 87V list price to e.g. ~$200, it would be more cost effective and give the Agilent tough competition, except if you absolutely need functions only the 1272a can deliver.

That would be nice, but I suspect they won't do that while it's still selling like hot cakes based on it's (deservedly earned) reputation.

Dave.

[EEVblog]

I have watched your videos, the tear down and the test were the Agilent failed. I was also very happy with your reply to that video that Agilent actally cared about user reviews. They took it seriously and (hopefully) fixed the bugs with firmware v2.0. It was interesting to see that Fluke took much longer to come back with a solution to their problem with the 87V.

To be fair, it wasn't the same scenario. Agilent only had to do a firmware patch, whereas Fluke had to very cautiously redesign the board in their best selling multimeter. But yeah, they could have kept us in the loop on what they were doing.

The really good thing, I think, about what Agilent is doing today is providing us with a different option when it come to buy a well made DMM. Fluke use to have the monopol now it would be good to see what they do.

Indeed.

Here I kind of agree Dave, in the lab yes we need perhaps a better more audible continuity beeper. but the Agilent guys have come up with a great idea with the Light Alert. Out on the field, especially in busy factories its is a must to have I would say.
The test done earlier on the comparison between the 287, 87V and the U1272A showed that the Agilent was a bit slower but again I would need to confirm that when I get it. Well I reckon that the light is faster than the beeper for the Agilent.

It very clear that the audible is a fair bit slower than the visual, look at my review video.
Yes, I agree the visual alert is nice.

Dave.

[Adrien]

It very clear that the audible is a fair bit slower than the visual, look at my review video

Is this a new video Dave? Is it posted on EEVBlog's home page?

Adrien

[nanofrog]

The main lead set that came with several of my 1272a and the 1252a were top quality

They're decent, but there was a bit more to it than ergonomics in my case (had some ridges I scrapped to smooth out). But I've never had to do that with Fluke, Pomona, or Probemaster.

...however the accessory lead sets are low quality, Extech style PVC type.

Save the insertion issues, the alligator clips seem quite good, and the SMT Grabbers (U1163A) I ordered separately use 18AWG silicone wire (have the same insertion issue as the alligator clips).

Perhaps they use different wire with those included with the meters or decided to change it at a later date. 

I have some of the Probemaster 8000 series leads and they are indeed very nice (on par with Fluke, IMO).  Note that they have a somewhat unusual grip, which I personally like, but is more rounded than Fluke/Pomona.

I'm fond of how the Softie's feel too. 

[EEVblog]

Is this a new video Dave? Is it posted on EEVBlog's home page?

Yes, just uploaded to Youtube.
Not on the blog site yet.

Dave.

[Adrien]

Hey Dave,

Just watched it. Great work!
Liked the way you presented it and also how you went over the pros and cons.
Definitely has the bang for buck factor, I will probably order mine this week and get the USB cable with it.
Thanks again for that video. The issue with overloading was a good thing to point out. Now unless you have been working for 30 hours straight or are a complete noob I don't think this should happen too often.

Adrien

[EEVblog]

Thanks again for that video. The issue with overloading was a good thing to point out. Now unless you have been working for 30 hours straight or are a complete noob I don't think this should happen too often.

Yeah, not a huge deal I guess, it recovered which is the main point.

Dave.