Which osciloscope will be better?

[Wbm]

Hello,

I've received a very good offer for R&S HMO1222 and Tek MSO2022B, first one 8 digital channels the second has 16 digital channels.

Which one will be better option if the price is not as issue?


regards,
--
Wbm.

[Karlo_Moharic]

for that price point R&S is a better option.

[Wbm]

Hi Karlo,

Thanks for the reply, what if I can get each one (Tek and R&S) in the price of R&S? Still R&S over the Tek? The first look on the numbers on paper (GSPS, Mpts, wfm/s) and R&S looks better but there's always devil in the details.


regards,
--
Wbm.

[james_s]

It would be helpful to know what it is you intend to use it for.

[Wbm]

Hi James,

I'm kinda begginer so for now I would like to have a reliable tool for inspecting simple prototypes, AVR based boards, etc. Most important for me is to have the best tool for the next few years within the money I can spent now.


regards,
--
Wbm.

[Doctorandus_P]

Oscilloscopes havedropped in price and improved in performance to an almost redicilous degree in the last 10 to 15 years.
If you buy a Rigol / Siglent scope for 1/4 of the money you seem to be willing to spend now, you will still have much more oscilloscope than you will need for years to come.

Do the Tek and R&S come with software & hardware for the Logic analyser channels?
Take for example a look at the Siglent SDS1104X
https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Siglent-SDS1104X-E.html

For EUR500 you have a 4 channel scope (EUR720 for 200MHz) with a bunch of serial protocols already built in.
But for the full 16 channel Logic Analyser you have to add Hardware & software options for another EUR450.

Apart from an oscilloscope, the (extemely cheap) LA's from Ali / Ebay are wonderfull.
Even EUR 5 hardware (Search for "24Mhz 8ch") is plenty fast for working with AVR's, and if you combine it with  the excellent open source Sigrok / Pulseview software you get a bunch of advantages you do not have on a Mixed signal scope. And for a bit more money you can plug more capable hardware into Pulseview.

- A buckload of decoders for different protocols. ( 40 or so at the moment).
- Larger screen, which is a real plus for LA software.
- Ability to add / tweak your own protocol decoders.
    ( A decoder is typically only a few pages of Python script).
- Direct logging to your PC for further analysis.

I would not recommend a PC based oscilloscope, because a panel with buttons is a much better user interface for an oscilloscope. But this is not true for a Logic Analyser. Keyboard + Mouse + PC monitor is an excellent UI for a LA.

In my opinion such a LA should be included in every beginner lab. Prices are so low it is really a no-brainer and you will be amazed what you can do with it.
Also, if you want / need to upgrade after 5 to 10 years you have a much better idea of what your real needs are, and you will then have better hardware for the same price.

As "kinda begginer" you also always have the risk of doing someting really stupid with your oscilloscope and blow up a front end or similar.
Even an EUR400 Siglent SDS1202X-E is probably already more scope than you will need for years to come, and you can always sell it if you feel the need for a better scope.

[Spudlicious]

I cannot dispute anything Doctorandus _P writes above, and most certainly I agree a USB dongle logic analyser is basic kit for the electronics hobbyist.  The LA is very educational as well as being a diagnostic tool, but I think there is more to learn from a scope because it shows much more of the truth. Those neat pulses with square manly shoulders the LA shows are not the reality, and it gives no hint of the noise present on signal lines or what might be borderline logic levels. That the LA is divorced from realtime is another factor remedied by using a scope, and after using one for just a few weeks I can say it has opened my eyes to many aspects of circuit action.

I'm not familiar with the high end (from my hobbyist perspective) scopes the OP mentions but either would sit well on my desk. Although there's no such thing as future-proofing in electronics or anything else, the higher sample rate of the R&S would swing it for me because although at the moment I've not examined a signal above 16MHz, who knows what I might be grappling with next year? Besides which, since a scope shows us a graph interpolated from sample points it seems to me that you can't have too many of those points. Enjoy your choice and your scope, you have an interesting learning curve ahead of you.

[Karlo_Moharic]

R&S is just higher quality . So yes R&S over tektronix any day.

[Wbm]

Thank you all for your responses, after reading Doctorandus_P response I've decided to look closer into these LA's. Spent some time ;-) and watched few EEVblog episodes (#436, #692, #290, #1056). They all about USB Logic Analysers and as someone who I know says: "if you’re using a good equipment to start with then it helps you know that it’s not the equipment problem".

What I can say now is that few of the vendors of these devices went with the price range from ~$150 to even over $1k and I don't want to buy a chineese clone just to figure out that with the new software release the device it's bricked ;-)

So I've decided to talk with R&S supplier and finally got some serious discount for 1212 model with protocol decoding features for free. Whenever I will need more MHz I can always buy an upgrade license, the hardware for 100MHz, 200MHz and 300MHz is the same (according to #842 and #879 episodes).

@Karlo_Moharic: so finally, R&S over Tek!

Thank you all for your comments.

regards,
--
Wbm.

[Doctorandus_P]

About those cheap logic analysers.
This is a very good introduction into Logic Analysers in general and working with Sigrok / Pulseview: