| Electronics > Beginners |
| Best Oscilloscope for complete beginner? |
| << < (8/10) > >> |
| exe:
--- Quote from: DDunfield on April 21, 2019, 03:00:12 pm ---FWIW, I don't mind the touch screen on my phone or tablets, but I dislike them on test equipment for the same reason I don't like them in my car .. you can't operate them without looking at them. --- End quote --- Why would one want to operate the oscilloscope blindly? :) It's the tool to visualize in the first place, I do settings in trial-n-error approach, when I have to use vert/horiz controls and trigger until I see a satisfactory capture. There is more than one knob to adjust on a good scope... Anyway, I'm gonna say you how you should use your scope... Just I feel like we are discussing an imaginary scenario, not based on actual usage of a real touch-screen oscilloscope with a UI optimized for screen controls. I personally found it more convenient to use virtual controls because they are closer to the waveform. I have my "adjusting" hand and the waveform in the same view, so no problems for me. Of course, one may say that touch screens are glossy, they collect fingerprints, don't work with wet hands, etc. But I suggest just try micsig, it really has a good UI in terms of usability. A little bit slow to respond, but that's not an issue with a touchscreen. |
| james_s:
You don't operate it blindly, you change the setting you need to change, capture the event you want to see, then you look up at the screen. I've been using touch screens on various equipment since they first started to get common around 30 years ago when I was just a kid. I hated them then and I hate them now, I've always had problems getting touches to register, or I bump it and end up with accidental touches. They get sticky and gross, they don't work well if your fingers are too moist or not moist enough. There is no tactile feedback, they're just irritating. I tolerate touchscreens when there is no better alternative but they are inferior to buttons. I don't even want to get started on cars, whoever decided it would be a good idea to bury functions in nested menus that you have to try to operate while watching the road should be shot. All necessary functions in a car should be controlled by physical buttons and switches that I can operate by memory without taking my eyes off the road to look at them. |
| DDunfield:
--- Quote from: exe on April 21, 2019, 03:43:05 pm ---Why would one want to operate the oscilloscope blindly? :) It's the tool to visualize in the first place, I do settings in trial-n-error approach, when I have to use vert/horiz controls and trigger until I see a satisfactory capture. There is more than one knob to adjust on a good scope... --- End quote --- Who said anything about "operating blindly" ... It's perfectly ok to not agree with another opinion, but why feel the need to ridicule it? I can think of lots of cases where I use the controls without looking at them. (Just to be clear, I don't want to look at them because I'd rather focus on details of the waveform). A few examples: - Trying to capture an elusive event - repeatedly hitting the "Single/Arm/etc." key (ok, it's a key not a knob, but it has physical borders) - On a touch screen it's very easy to get "off" from the button, Just try to backspace character by character over a long line on your phone without looking at it. Once I decide to try again, I don't want to waste time making sure my finger is in the right spot. Since I can feel the button under it, I know it's in the right spot. - Positioning the cursors .. I want to focus on putting them exactly where I want, not back and forth to the side of the screen for a "virtual control". Yeah, you might be able plant your finger on the screen, try not to cover up what you want to see and move them with the resolution afforded by a finger sliding on glass, but I happen to prefer a precision encoder. - Getting just what I want on the screen, usually involves adjusting Horizontal scale and position .. two knobs right above/below each other on my scopes, easy to move between them by feel. Not so much if all you feel is a flat surface. For that matter, it's pretty easy to move back and forth to the vertical without looking.. use a scope enough and you will be able to operate much of it by "feel". And, yep, I recognize that for some UI's you can pinch and slide but again, I personally find it easier to perform precision adjustments with "out of band" rotary knobs than "in band" fingers on glass, Another aspect of touch controls for bench instruments (not as significant for hand-held) is that you either have to rest your wrist on the bench, fingertips elsewhere on the device, or deal with a long "lever" (your arm) when making precision adjustments. The rotary motion of knobs provides better precision (for me at least) when my arm is unsupported than sliding side to side. That's not say I wouldn't use a touch-screen scope, I feel the same way about having to twiddle controls with a mouse on PC based instruments, but I do it for my portable kit because a USB scope is the best compromise between size and functionality. That being said, given a choice, I prefer knobs and buttons I can manipulate by feel. I can have that luxury on my bench. This is my opinion/experience, given to provide counterbalance to other welcome opinions presented in the discussion. In the end, the choice is up to the buyer. Dave |
| rstofer:
--- Quote from: Gyro on April 20, 2019, 08:30:45 am ---From my review, I think the isolated version is worth the (not so significant on ebay) difference. Yes its purpose is to break the ground loop rather than floating at elevated voltages (although the isolation components have decent rating). Trashing your PC isn't the best way to experience early stage learning, although they will have to understand the issue / danger of ground loops at some point. It also usefully reduces noise levels in some circumstances. --- End quote --- I run my Analog Discovery 2 through a powered hub. It doesn't break the ground connection but the hub, rather than the PC, provides the power. Believe me, I think about the possibilities of destruction every time I use a PC based 'thing' including uC boards connected to off-board things. All run through the hub. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00VDVCQ84/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Breaking the ground connection is a better plan, no doubt. I don't work on high voltage <anything>, +-15V is about my limit. No real reason, I just don't work on things that operate at higher voltage. If I want an SMPS at running off mains, I buy it! I'm getting old and I have been using analog scopes for 60+ years including the one I built from the ARRL Handbook back around '58. So, I have a wee bit of time in grade! I don't see where spending any time with an analog scope teaches anything that can't be learned equally fast on a DSO. There are only 3 elementary controls and they are identical: Volts/div, Time/div and trigger level (polarity). Yes, there is AC vs DC coupling and that is just as easy to change on a DSO as it is on an analog scope. Tap the channel button and the selection button is at the top of the list. Every single thing you can learn on an analog scope is equally easy to learn on a DSO. Well, 'delayed sweep' might be a challenge but that's for the advanced user anyway. I have NEVER used the feature on my Tek 485. Not once! If an analog scope was available, sure, use it! If not, don't spend $5 buying one if the intent is to buy a DSO. Well, maybe $5. But certainly not $100. I like my Tek 485, I got it cheap ($200) and it works well. It sits, unused, under my bench since I got the DS1054Z. The DSO has features the analog scope couldn't even dream of. Measurements comes to mind! How about Single Shot? Try that with an analog scope (other than a storage scope). Single Shot is the biggest feature of the DSO and it is truly important. Want to get started with a DSO? Connect the probe to the calibration output and press "Auto". Then look at the screen to learn about Volts/div and Time/div. Twist the knobs, see how the display changes. Now progress at your leisure. You know how to get the trace on the screen - something they used to have to put a "Beam Finder" button for in the old days of analog scopes and all it did was verify that the scope could provide a trace but didn't help find it (think high voltage DC coupled with V/div set at some low value). I'm not sure what to think about a USB scope. Sure, my AD2 is USB based and the UI isn't horrible. I don't know how the VDS1022I UI works. I watched a short video but I can't say I was impressed. So, in the near future, I'll buy one just to test it out. They're cheap enough and I have an application so why not? There are a lot of people taking the position that a new user should start with an analog scope. Fine! But tell me exactly WHY? What are they going to learn that isn't nearly identical on a DSO? I started with an analog scope (by definition) but now that I have had a DSO for a couple of years, I can't think of a single valid reason to recommend such a thing UNLESS the issue was bandwidth. Price wise, a used high bandwidth analog scope is going to be a LOT cheaper than a new high bandwidth DSO. But it's used... And what about measurements? Decoding? Single Shot? The analog is about as useful as a '55 Ford. |
| rstofer:
--- Quote from: DDunfield on April 21, 2019, 05:57:40 pm ---This is my opinion/experience, given to provide counterbalance to other welcome opinions presented in the discussion. In the end, the choice is up to the buyer. --- End quote --- And the market will decide... I like knobs and buttons. The modern DSO has too many adjustments to use physical knobs so I suppose the soft menu thing is here to stay. I don't think I will rush right in for a touch screen unless I can use it with a mouse. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |