Electronics > Beginners
Is the Rigol DS1054Z still the best entry level digital scope for the price?
<< < (10/22) > >>
rstofer:

--- Quote from: ebastler on May 02, 2017, 11:40:54 am ---
--- Quote from: cowana on May 02, 2017, 11:26:06 am ---I don't see the 100MHz bandwidth as much of a limit - typically I2C runs at 400kHz, and SPI at a few MHz (when used to talk to sensors on an 8-bit arduino or other simple micro).

--- End quote ---

I would agree -- for the hobby applications I am interested in, there seems to be a bit of a no-man's land above 100 MHz (or even less than that). Microcontroller clocks and the "pedestrian" serial busses are easily accessible with <= 100 MHz bandwidth. And the level requires much more bandwidth -- e.g. HDMI, USB, PC processors.

--- End quote ---

The reason for the gap is cost.  The nearest competitor to the DS1054Z costs around $1200 and getting even more bandwidth drives the cost well beyond the hobby level.


--- Quote ---
I have personally not come across an application where 200 MHz would have enabled me to do something which was not accessible at 100 MHz. But I'm sure someone will point out valid examples any moment!  ;)

--- End quote ---

I think my FPGA projects would benefit from more bandwidth.  I usually run them at 50 MHz and the 200 MHz Siglent might allow me to display up to the 5th harmonic.  Not everything runs at 50 MHz and my logic analyzer will capture at 200 MHz so all is not lost by having just 100 MHz bandwidth.

It's the square waves that drive the bandwidth requirement.  You need a bunch of harmonics.
ebastler:

--- Quote from: rstofer on May 02, 2017, 03:25:28 pm ---The reason for the gap is cost.  The nearest competitor to the DS1054Z costs around $1200 and getting even more bandwidth drives the cost well beyond the hobby level.

--- End quote ---

Actually I meant a gap in relevant applications requiring that bandwidth, not in available TME. But the TME gap is very real too, for the reasons you mention. I wonder to what extent this is just pricing policy -- I don't think making a scope with twice the sampling rate and bandwidth would triple the cost.


--- Quote ---I think my FPGA projects would benefit from more bandwidth.  I usually run them at 50 MHz and the 200 MHz Siglent might allow me to display up to the 5th harmonic.  Not everything runs at 50 MHz and my logic analyzer will capture at 200 MHz so all is not lost by having just 100 MHz bandwidth.

It's the square waves that drive the bandwidth requirement.  You need a bunch of harmonics.

--- End quote ---

But most of the signals live inside the FPGA anyway... In my FPGA tinkering so far, the signals I brought out were either much slower and hence easily accessible, or were way out of my DS1054Z's range (HDMI).
ebclr:
200 Mhz at 1 Gs , isn't that different from the DS1054Z 100Mhz at 1 Gs/ especially if you consider that the Rigol frontend can go easily higher than 100 Mhz, 120 Mhz for sure, tested without no attenuation with my SDG2122X

The point is  price

SDS1202X-E 380 USD  for 2 channels 1G/s max , Analog front end 200 Mhz
DS1054Z      399 USD hacked  4 chanells  1G/s max,  , Analog front end 100 Mhz ( can go higher under specified)

Basically, you are trading 4ch to 2 ch for 19 USD, because with same sample rate the 200Mhz will be nothing. Don't expect Siglent to be  king of usability on firmware, same Chinese thinking
rstofer:

--- Quote from: ebclr on May 03, 2017, 03:52:06 am ---200 Mhz at 1 Gs , isn't that different from the DS1054Z 100Mhz at 1 Gs/ especially if you consider that the Rigol frontend can go easily higher than 100 Mhz, 120 Mhz for sure, tested without no attenuation with my SDG2122X


--- End quote ---

In the video, the author pumped 400 MHz into the Siglent.  It wasn't pretty but 300 MHz looked pretty good.  Attenuated a bit but probably workable.


--- Quote ---
Basically, you are trading 4ch to 2 ch for 19 USD, because with same sample rate the 200Mhz will be nothing. Don't expect Siglent to be  king of usability on firmware, same Chinese thinking

--- End quote ---

With the Rigol, you split 1 GS/s over 4 channels at 100 MHz and get 250 MS/s or 2.5 times sampling at 100 MHz.
For the Siglent, you split 1 GS/s over 2 channels at 200 MHz and get 250 MS/s or 2.5 times sampling at 200 MHz.

It seems to me that the sample rate is about the same with all channels in use.

The Rigol has the advantage of 1 GS/s over 1 channel at 100 MHz or 10 times sampling versus the Siglent with 1 GS/s at 200 MHz or 5 times sampling.  Fair enough!  But it's 200 MHz, not 100 MHz and 2.5 sampling has been a standard in the industry for a very long time.  Nevertheless, more is better.

I would love to see a side-by-side shootout comparing all of the features.

Four channels is nice, it's why I bought the Rigol but bandwidth is also nice.  Given both models available at the time, I'm not sure which I would have chosen.

I'm not sure I won't just order the Siglent for giggles and compare them myself.  Not that I'm qualified...
rstofer:
There's a thread over in Test Equipment that might be worth reading.  Apparently, the firmware might not be 'oopsie' free.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod