EEVblog 1630 - Micsig MDP700 HV Differential Probe Review

[EEVblog]

Micsig MDP700 High Voltage Differential probe review and comparison wit the older DP10007 and the EEVblog HVP70 probe.
https://s.click.aliexpress.com/e/_DnNvolN



00:00 - Micsig MDP700 High Voltage Differential probe unboxing
08:50 - Basic differential probe measurement test
12:00 - Noise measurements
15:20 - CMRR measurement using FRA
21:43 - Spot frequency CMRRR measurement technique
24:51 - Measuring Unicorn farts at 100MHz
26:45 - Conclusion

CMRR measured and explained:
GaN MOSFET Experiemnts with fibre optic high voltage probe:
Reverse engineering the DP10007:

[FxDev]

@EEVblog Dave I think you are wrong 
They fixed the DP series 

Joking aside, I recently ordered the Micsig DP10013 model from the link below. Later, I actually received the DP10013 but with a difference—it's actually from the DP1500 series

https://www.amazon.com.tr/dp/B074K4XPW3?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details

I don't know why they did this, but getting the DP1500 series instead of the DP10013 made me happy

I guess they named it DP10013 to avoid issues with the place I bought it from; otherwise, a clueless customer might have returned it saying that they didn't receive this brand.

I compared with Tektronix THDP0200 and Micsic DP1500 series with 350V. As you can see, there is no difference.

[Kleinstein]

For the noise comparison it may have made more sense to set the BW to 20 MHz at the scope (most scopes offer this). I don't think they have specs for this, but this would be the same BW for all 3 probes and very reasonable setting for real life use too.

The spot measurement at 10 MHz should not use the AC-RMS, but ideally would compare FFT components. The RMS includes quite some noise from other frequencies.

Not having averaging in the frequency response function is a bit disappointing. It does not need to be explicite averaging as with the scope. Just a longer timer per point and this lower speed would do it as well or even better. With the very high attenuation one may have to check that there is no scope internal coupling. The isolation between the channels may not be that much bettter on some scopes.

[ballsystemlord]

@Dave , I can explain the behavior of your R&S scope. I know the answer as to why it doesn't do averaging when going beyond the native resolution of the ADC because I've been spending way too much time looking at these higher resolution scopes. I say "looking" because I can't afford them.  But anyway, the reason is because they're doing averaging/decimation to get you to that 18bits of resolution. Any further averaging would have a multiplicative effect on the amount of samples that needed to be captured. Likewise, you drop down from 18bits to 16bits as frequency increases because of the same.

I'd like to see the teardown.

I can't post on YT because I don't have a YT account. I deleted it years ago after they started censoring everyone and his cousin's YT channel (even the non-political channels). Though before that, I noted that I had already been "shadow banned" to some extent. This was really weird because I never posted about politics, or any other hot button topic.

Thanks

[EEVblog]

@Dave , I can explain the behavior of your R&S scope. I know the answer as to why it doesn't do averaging when going beyond the native resolution of the ADC because I've been spending way too much time looking at these higher resolution scopes. I say "looking" because I can't afford them.  But anyway, the reason is because they're doing averaging/decimation to get you to that 18bits of resolution. Any further averaging would have a multiplicative effect on the amount of samples that needed to be captured. Likewise, you drop down from 18bits to 16bits as frequency increases because of the same.

Yes, this is correct, and R&S have confirmed this.