New Agilent scopes

[grenert]

With the new (desperate?) lower pricing on Tektronix scopes
http://www.tek.com/products/oscilloscopes/landing/2011salesevent/
I think the DPO/MSO 2000 series could be worthy competition for the Agilent 2000 series.  The screen is not as nice, of course, but it's a step above the Rigol types.  Waveform capture is a pretty good 5000/sec.  There are some features that top the Agilents (more like features from the Agilent 3000 series):
1 M points record length
More triggering options (rise time, glitch, etc.)
16 digital channels in MSO models
Digital filtering
Search function
And they're throwing in serial decode for free!

So, depending on the features you're looking for, I think it would be good to consider the Tek as well.

[Chasm]

Anyone got actual prices on the various options?

Not yet. It should not take much more time.

I have some (rounded) prices:

HMO1024 - 4-channel 100 MHz, 4 x 1GS/s: 1700 Euro + VAT
HMO1524 - 4-channel 150 MHz, 4 x 1GS/s: 2000 Euro + VAT
HMO2024 - 4-channel 200 MHz, 4 x 1GS/s: 2200 Euro + VAT


Options:
HO3508 - Probe, 8-Channel-Logic: EUR 290 + VAT (for mixed signal functions)
HOO10 - I²C/SPI/UART: EUR 290 + VAT (via logic probes, HOO11 via analog channels is free)
HO730 - Dual LAN/USB with Webserver: EUR 220 + VAT
HO740 - GPIB: EUR 270 + VAT

[Franki]

I think I like these new Hameg HMOs, especially for their supposedly flash A/D-converters, which is really handy for the type of measurements I would itend to use it for. Hopefully its A/D-converters stand up for their low-noise labeling. On the other hand, 2000 - 2500 wfms/sec really isn't that much, which would exclude it from certain other uses...

Do the new Agilent scopes have flash A/D-converters too or do they have analog delay lines?

[Wim_L]

Most scopes would have flash converters, that's also why they generally don't have more than 8 bits of resolution. Cost and power consumption really goes through the roof exponentially as you add bits to a flash ADC.

I'm ot sure if they are the same as the ones used in their analog/digital combiscopes, but if they are, yes, they're pretty good by cheap oscilloscope standards. Though the combination of long memory and its default display mode makes them look like another scope in peak detect mode, so the first impression is that they're really noisy. That's just an artifact of the standard settings which are biased to detecting glitches more than they are to showing off the ADC performance.

[Ronnie]

Why no ground coupling? - there is a ground level mark on the side of the screen so you don't really need it.

The advantage of having a ground coupling option is the ability to check inherent noise of the input amplifiers and ADCs. Knowing the scope inherent noise you can measure the actual noise by using the formula RSS (root-sum-square) with the assumption the noise being measured is Gaussian in nature.

[firewalker]

I don;t know if anyone asked it or mentioned it, but Dave, did you tried "The Unusual Oscilloscope Phenomenon" on those scopes?

 

[alm]

The advantage of having a ground coupling option is the ability to check inherent noise of the input amplifiers and ADCs. Knowing the scope inherent noise you can measure the actual noise by using the formula RSS (root-sum-square) with the assumption the noise being measured is Gaussian in nature.

Some DSO's just fake it with a digital Y=0 signal. Putting a 50ohm terminator (which is almost a short compared to 1Mohm, at least at low frequencies) on the input appear to work pretty well.

Back in the days before automated measurements, cursors and readout, ground coupling was much more important, since you didn't have any other way to find out the vertical offset.

[Franki]

Figuring out Rohde&Schwarz pricing is dead easy, simply add another zero to whatever the highest priced competitor is charging.  
Not really, but it surely can't be to far from the truth.

Anyone got actual prices on the various options?

Yes, I found one price for the basic Hameg HMO702 "somewhere"http://www.fe-kl.de/Elektronik/fe-oszilloskop.htm on the net, don't hold me for that.

It's 1366,12€ in Germany VAT included, which would mean 1148,-€ VAT excluded. This would be ~ US$ 1602.7 considering an approximated EUR/USD change ratio of 1.4. I have no idea how much this would be in AU$.

OK. I've crunched up the numbers. If that's correct, then the entry level Hameg HMO702 (1148,-€) is proposed to cost ~15% more than the entry level Agilent DSOX2002A (996,-€ VAT excl.). I'm really not sure whether its improvements are worth that much money.

So, If it's true that Hameg appears to launch these new scopes to the market in July 2011, will you get one as an early adopter for testing and previewing purposes? I think we would all be interested in some Agilent vs. Hameg real-world tests  

See here for technical questions about the new Hameg HMO scope series: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=2923.0

[EEVblog]

So, If it's true that Hameg appears to launch these new scopes to the market in July 2011, will you get one as an early adopter for testing and previewing purposes? I think we would all be interested in some Agilent vs. Hameg real-world tests 

Agilent were smart in contacting me well ahead of launch date and ensuring I had units to review on the date of the launch.
Hameg/Lecroy aren't as smart apparently, and Lecroy have contacted me before but apparently aren't that fond of my blog.
I could probably get one some way if I really tried I guess.

I've been offered the new Rigol 6000 and Goodwill 3000's for review if I want through the local dealer.

Dave.

[Lance]

So, If it's true that Hameg appears to launch these new scopes to the market in July 2011, will you get one as an early adopter for testing and previewing purposes? I think we would all be interested in some Agilent vs. Hameg real-world tests 

Agilent were smart in contacting me well ahead of launch date and ensuring I had units to review on the date of the launch.
Hameg/Lecroy aren't as smart apparently, and Lecroy have contacted me before but apparently aren't that fond of my blog.
I could probably get one some way if I really tried I guess.

I've been offered the new Rigol 6000 and Goodwill 3000's for review if I want through the local dealer.

Dave.

Sounds like a plan.

[EEVblog]

Sounds like a plan.

Yeah, but unfortunately it takes a crap load of time to review a scope...

Dave.

[Lance]

Sounds like a plan.

Yeah, but unfortunately it takes a crap load of time to review a scope...

Dave.

I can imagine. Plus actually cutting together all the video...ouch. I guess it might be worth it though if the company loves your opinion of their hardware. Besides, you get more freebies!

[ErnieEngineer]

I really want to buy one of these! I may get the InfiniiVision 2000 or InfiniiVision 3000 series in 200 MHz with the logic analyzer option . What do you guys think about this thing not having and adjustable FIR filter? My rigol has this and I use it all the time. Is it typical to hook up some kind of external filter to a scope?

Does anybody know how fast the I can measure signals with the logic analyzer? The logic analyzer function is specked at 1Gsample/sec. How fast of a clock signal could I feed into this thing and actually see a square wave with a 50 percent duty cycle and correct frequency?

Finally what do you guys/girls think about the memory depth on the 2000 vs the 3000, is the memory depth on the 2000 sufficient?

Thanks, ill do a new member introduction post soon :-)

[Lance]

I really need an oscilloscope. These look like a decent buy, but the 3000 ones are a bit pricey.

[grenert]

Tektronix has recently put together a comparison of their DPO2000 series with the Agilent 2000-X series:
http://www2.tek.com/cmswpt/pidownload.lotr?ct=PI&cs=cpc&ci=18196&lc=EN

They must have watched Dave's review.  They include pictures of the Agilent display showing "XXX is not available on the InfinVision 2000 X-series oscilloscopes"   

Competition is good!  I hope it drives some more features into their lower-end scopes.

[Lance]

Tektronix has recently put together a comparison of their DPO2000 series with the Agilent 2000-X series:
http://www2.tek.com/cmswpt/pidownload.lotr?ct=PI&cs=cpc&ci=18196&lc=EN

They must have watched Dave's review.  They include pictures of the Agilent display showing "XXX is not available on the InfinVision 2000 X-series oscilloscopes"   

Competition is good!  I hope it drives some more features into their lower-end scopes.

Is there a reason to keep them out? Are those features really that expensive?

[mikeselectricstuff]

They seem to be scratching around for things that make theirs look better..
They even list Bus display mode for theirs, which Agilent also has (as shown further down!)
 Memory depth seems the biggest difference - I think Agilent probably should have included more memory on the 2000 to make it more competitive.

No mention of update rate.....

[grenert]

Is there a reason to keep them out? Are those features really that expensive?

They're expensive for you    You need to go with the much pricier Agilent 3000-X series to get them. 
For Agilent, there is no physical hardware to add for these, just need to program software.  Given that they've already done the programming on the similar 3000-X, it would probably be minimal effort to port to the 2000-X.  So, the cost to Agilent is cheap.

It's all marketing, and we lose 

[dimlow]

So Dave, when you putting the donated scope up in the competition ? You did say you was going to give away stuff that was sent to you for review...  So where to i put my "Im in" message ?

[grenert]

They seem to be scratching around for things that make theirs look better..
They even list Bus display mode for theirs, which Agilent also has (as shown further down!)

I think they're referring to decode of the serial bus, which the Agilent 2000 doesn't do.

Memory depth seems the biggest difference - I think Agilent probably should have included more memory on the 2000 to make it more competitive.

No mention of update rate.....

In addition to the memory weakness, I think the better triggering from the 3000 should have been included on the 2000 as well.
The Agilent is way faster for update rate, but the Tek is not bad for this price range: 5000 per second.

[DavidDLC]

Today I received my Agilent InfiniiVision DSO-X-2012A 2 Channel 100 MHz.

Looks and feel very nice.

Too sad I need to buy too many options, so far I have discovered that I need to buy the options for:

- Signal Generator
- Digital Channels
- No serial decode

and probably more that I will be discovering by the time.

[EEVblog]

They seem to be scratching around for things that make theirs look better..
They even list Bus display mode for theirs, which Agilent also has (as shown further down!)

I think they're referring to decode of the serial bus, which the Agilent 2000 doesn't do.

Memory depth seems the biggest difference - I think Agilent probably should have included more memory on the 2000 to make it more competitive.

No mention of update rate.....

In addition to the memory weakness, I think the better triggering from the 3000 should have been included on the 2000 as well.
The Agilent is way faster for update rate, but the Tek is not bad for this price range: 5000 per second.

The 2000 has the exact same Megazoom ASIC chip as the 3000, so is actually capable of the same specs and functions
i.e. 1,000,000 wfm/s, all the serial decode, 4M memory etc
It is just software crippled to create a lower price point.
They left the serial decode button in place on the 2000 "just in case" they decide to enable it one day.

Dave.

[EEVblog]

Today I received my Agilent InfiniiVision DSO-X-2012A 2 Channel 100 MHz.

Looks and feel very nice.

Too sad I need to buy too many options, so far I have discovered that I need to buy the options for:

- Signal Generator
- Digital Channels
- No serial decode

and probably more that I will be discovering by the time.

You can't buy serial decode on the 2000 series at this stage, it's not an option.
The other options you can play with by downloading the 14 day trial license key.
I heard a rumor that it may be worth playing with the system clock after you do that.

Dave.

[dimlow]

Maybe you should change to date before you download that! to say maybe a few years in the future ?

[DavidDLC]

Maybe you should change to date before you download that! to say maybe a few years in the future ?

Not possible, I set the time to 8:31 am instead of 8:31 pm, I didn't check the time format, and when tried to install the 14 days trial for the Wave Generator it complained about different time and didn't install.