INSTEK 3000 series

[IC]

Is there anyone with experience of the INSTEK Scope. I'm considering purchasing this scope and would appreciate peoples opinions. What is good, what to watch out for etc.

Thankyou

[saturation]

There are several reviews discussions I recall in the archives of various models; why not find those and post there so the thread won't repeat what's in there.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=2562.msg60507#msg60507

[vlf3]

It depends on the exact model in this series range, what's missing in their on-line spec is memory depth Gs/ps or points...
however it refers to 25K points, and sounds reasonable but would urge you to find the full spec before buying,    otherwise
my experience with GW Instek products are quite good.

See URL:   http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1290

[IC]

Apologies for not including enough information, the scope that I'm looking at purchasing is the GDS-3354, its a 350MHz four channel scope. Due to the larg(ish) financial outlay I'm interested in responses from members who have had direct contact with said scope. I would like to thank those who have responded as their links were extremely useful and gave me extra reading to help me digest all its qualities.

Looking forward to the insights and information.......... IC

[IC]

Hello to everyone out there. I'm a teacher (not of electronics) but with an interest in Electronics.

I live in south western Sydney, my interests are Photography, Graphic Arts, Woodwork (Boxologist) and of course Electronics.

Being a little older than the young generation it was quite a task to get registered and participate in this site, I suppose I'm still an analog unit in this digital world. Blogs are a whole new world to me, however, sadly my only proficiency is DataBase design ....... I consider myself an expert here, sadly my colleagues would beg to differ.

I'm currently in the process of setting up a workbench, I have decided to cast of all my old gear, most of which is failing me or failed long ago. I have committed to go all new, this has offered a lot of problems to me as I'm really unsure of what gear to purchase. I have already committed to a new GW Power Supply and a Fluke 289. I would appreciate any advice on the following areas ...... Soldering Station (Hakko or Weller or .....), Function Generator & Counter, Bench top MM (four wire) ...... there are just so many out there .....though I like the consistency of GW as I'm committing anew.

I'm open to all suggestions re equipment purchase and value you direction as I believe that if you have had the sincerity to reply you genuinely wish to help me ...... I thank you in advance ..... best wishes to all IC

Any other gear to recommend and contacts for within Australia would be appreciated, thank you.

[saturation]

Hello IC:

You can get a lot of info in the eevblog archives regarding a standard set of bench tools; Dave has a video on this too.  The choices you've suggested are great, just some comments to think over :

Consider the prices in your country, could break a tie between competing products with similar specs. 

Any GW product is good, just can you justify the extra cost over competitors in being cost effective?  Is your tech support good in your country?

Fluke 289:  a hmmm on 100-200 hr battery life, and fairly close in performance to a bench meter.  DMM need to be rugged if its portable, and you rarely get lab conditions in the field to avail of the 50,000 counts.   If you intend to get a handheld and a bench meter, an 87V, Agilent 1272a or 1252b are competing choices.

Benchtop: Agilent 34410a.

Solder Station: for light duty, Hakko FX888.  Over time, Hakko is a more customer friendly than Weller, although today they are on par.  Hakko is a smaller company that has management closer to customers than  Weller, which is part of Cooper Tools, so you get a lot of corporate flack in their wares and services.   For heavy duty aka production level soldering, JBC, many choices, or equivalent Metcal 5000.

Function Generator: don't get analog function generators, DDS at the minimum, arbitrary waveform capacity is a plus .  No specific recommendation.  The GW choices are competitive, I have the SFG1003.

Counter: no recommendations.  You can get accurate 5 digits or more on your scope.

[kaz911]

I think the first question is: what will you do with it? AM/FM, Microcontrollers?, Powersupplies, build things for your camera? etc. etc.

I tend to buy portable or low weight stuff since I am an expat and expect to move "quite" often.

[alm]

I agree that the type of projects you intend to do is important. For example, if you're not into RF, you may not even need a counter. For typical micro controller projects, the most common interface requiring an accurate clock is RS-232, and it only requires the clock to be within +/- 2% or so. Something that can be easily met with an oscilloscope with hardware frequency counter. Even an analog scope could meet that spec if in cal. If you need/want a counter, my preference would be the used HP/Racal-Dana/Philips counters, since they're better quality than than the cheap new ones, and I don't need the features of the expensive new Agilent counters.

There are basic counters used for example to indicate the current frequency of a radio transmitter, these have a fairly limited number of features. The more elaborate timer/counters have more advanced triggering options, reciprocal counting (much higher resolution for lower frequencies without insanely long gate times) and features like period measurement and measuring delay between channels. If you don't use an external frequency reference, try to get at least an TCXO as reference and preferably an OCXO.

Handheld DMM: Fluke 289 is a fine DMM, but may be a little bit overkill, especially if you also have a bench DMM. The trend graph may be neat and convenient. I concur with Saturation that the 87V or high-end Agilent handhelds may be viable alternatives. If you don't mind the size or price, I don't see anything wrong with the 289, however. Unlike Dave, I don't mind the controls.

Bench DMM: Here I would seriously consider used since you can save almost an order of magnitude compared to new. A used HP 3468A/3478A, Keithley 199 or Fluke 8840A/8842A (check for AC true RMS option) can be had for $50-$200, and will probably satisfy most requirements regarding resolution and accuracy. The main thing they lack compared to more modern meters is computer interfaces (most have GPIB, which requires a ~$150 Prologix GPIB-USB adapter) and bells and whistles like frequency, continuity and diode check.

If you insist on buying new (one advantage is that you'll get it calibrated), I would only look at Agilent, Fluke and Keithley, since the cheaper ones are either too close to a good handheld like the Fluke 289 or cost almost as much as the top brands. For Agilent look at the 344xx series, not the cheaper series they inherited from Escort (U3400). I'm not a big fan of the cheapest Agilent 34405A or Fluke 8808A, since their basic DC accuracy is barely better than the Fluke 289. Nothing wrong with them if you only care about extra resolution, speed or four wire ability. I like the Keithley 2000, but I would not recommend the Keithley 2100 because it's a rebadged instrument with a number of annoying firmware bugs. So that basically leaves Agilent 34401A/34410A, Fluke 8845A/8846A and Keithley 2000. The Keithley 2000 is similar to the Agilent 34401A, the other instruments have better specs. The Agilent 34401A is the old industry standard and 34410A/34411A has replaced it in many places. A fair amount of information about Fluke 8845A/8846A vs. the competition has been posted by our local Fluke 884xA fanboy . No experience with the GW-Instek bench DMMs, and don't know anyone who has. Reports on this forum about the Rigol bench DMMs didn't seem that great.

Function generator: I would not buy anything but DDS. Don't spend the extra money on arbitrary functions unless you need it, it's not that important in my opinion. The cheap GW-Instek DDS gens (SFG-100x) seem decent. I wouldn't pay a premium for an internal counter. If you need more bandwidth (eg. for RF), or lower distortion (eg. audio), consider dedicated signal or pulse generators. A function generator is typically a jack of all trades, master of none. Which makes it a very useful instrument.

[Zad]

I shouldn't really, but I have to laugh at all the newcomers to the hobby who seem to think they have to have £2000 worth of gear before they even start. I'd kill to have half that list of gear in my lab! Consider that amateur radio has lost a lot of following over the years due to the "all the gear, no idea" guys who just write a cheque out for the latest black box, then get bored because it "doesn't do anything". Being a good engineer, or having fun with electronics is a matter of what goes on in the squishy stuff between your ears, not how much you have spent on big brand names.

Apologies if this sounds condescending, but you do sound like you are a shiny test equipment collector, not an electronics enthusiast. With an enthusiast the electronics comes first, the gear is purely incidental and comes as you need it. What is it that you will be doing that requires you to have a 350MHz quad channel 'scope? 99% of what I do (which is both digital and RF) can be done with one 1MHz channel, and 99.9% can be done with two 10MHZ channels.

[alm]

The difference between a hobby and a profession is that a hobby doesn't have to make a profit. A professional tool has to be worth the investment, so you wouldn't buy $2000 worth of test equipment unless it saves you $2000 in time and materials. A hobby is usually close to 0 return on investment, so what you buy depends on how much you can and want to spend first, and what it can do for you second. Many people owning a $300-$400 Rigol DSO might get just as much work done with a $20 20 MHz analog scope, and few hobbyists will buy a $100k piece of equipment, even if it reduces their time spent on a project by 95%.

Though the extra gear is not going to make someone a better engineer, it's unlikely to make them worse, either.

[vlf3]

Although I urged IC to look at the spec's, and some comments seem a little harsh however, there is much said in having just a basic set of equipment, and this will depend on the area's you intend to experiment or decide to build... for what it's worth, if your interest is in the high-end test equipment, that's fine but a lot of good experimental work can be done using built or second-user equipment, as one develops skill and understanding, you tend to realise what test equipment is required next... enough said. 

[IC]

Thank you to all who have responded, your genuine advice and sincerity is appreciated, particularly 'saturation', 'alm' and 'vlf3'.

Thank you Zad for your encouraging words. I suppose that after 30 years tinkering with electronics I don't consider myself a beginner or inexperienced, but without doubt I'm nowhere near your stratospheric levels of advancement . My life is so busy I have never been afforded the time chasing equipment of updating my current basic equipment that works (sort of) .... until now.

As I move into my new office and workshop I have been afforded the opportunity to update all my equipment. Thankfully my current financial situation allows me the luxury of choosing whatever I want, though I consider the outcomes of my research quite conservative.

I think Zad thought I was buying a Rohde & Schwarz and yes that was a possibility but I thought it was a bit too shiny, but well within my financial means. I love the condescending chuckle of people who have got by on scant equipment and consider they have earned their right of passage because of that ..... until this point in  my life I have done electronics with basically nothing, in fact I just sold my Tektronix 502A on ebay for $14, and it still worked .... poorly.

I consider myself very lucky, I recently retired and received a large financial payout, even luckier was my wife being a share winner in LOTTO, equipment prices are not an issue, believe me, I have 3,850,000 ways to choose electronic test equipment..... how lucky am I, my budget for the fit out was $50,000, though I think I will do it for $10,000 to $15,000.

For those who have offered genuine advice it has been appreciated and given me more research and more options, sadly for all us capitalists we have to make a decision on too many choices.

Agilent has become my choice for both an oscilloscope and function generator. I have committed to a new MSOX2012A. I have gone this path as they seem to be the name and have an incredible presence in the market place.

On a humorous note, my power supply of choice has been a wooden MDF box containing four transformers and various taps. It works fine, though I'm currently in jaw dropping mode considering all the current ranges out there, they do so many things, do they also do 'Voltage' and 'Current'?

My soldering station ... sorry iron is an old rotring iron ..... and yes I can do just as good a job as many of these new hot shot units. I have not been in the market for new gear for 15+ years, these times are very interesting. I doubt that I will ever be getting into surface mounting etc so a Hakko station seems to be the way to go, thanks for that advice.

I hope my new shiny equipment will work as well as my old unshiny equipment. That old unshiny equipment has allowed me to work in AM/FM radio, Micro controllers uC, PICS, EPROM programming, Assembler programming (despite Dave's rave it's an old skill that allows very clean fast processing), C++ programming, PLC's, Radio Controlled Helicopter equipment, CPU decoding, designed and built three Audio amplifiers over the last five years, Cad Eagle. Sorry Zad I didn't quite hear what you have done, I note your hero status is based on lots of posts ...... tell me about your elevated status in the electronics community .....ZAD

Sorry Zad, did I also mention that I also have a PhD in Applied Mathematics (UNSW), degrees in Plasma Physics (Syd Uni) and Electrical Engineering (Syd Uni) ........I shouldn't really, but I have to laugh at all the those (sorry .... some of those) experts that do lots of posts, so thats what makes them an expert ..... mmmm ...... bugger I only have five posts

[kaz911]

haha well said:-) congratulations on the win!

If you have the means - I would have gone with the Agilent 3000 series since you can upgrade more down the road. (I have the MSOX-3024a and I am very happy with it)

The waveform generator in the 2000 series is a bit crippled compared to the 3000 series. (No ARB function) But then you could get a seperate ARB wave gen - Agilent 33522a.

But since you are travelling down the Agilent road - I would stick there / and get devices with SCPI or LXI

So get the E3631a tripple output power supply - that should keep you going.

[IC]

Dear kaz911, thanks for the advice, I see what you are saying but I think that once I learn to control the new beast and learn all its vagaries I will then sell it and look at the 3000 series. I doubt I will outgrow the 3000 as it offers so much in a small package. The reality is that in electronics you rarely need above 10MHz, in my younger days there was the 5X rule, I don't know if this still applies or if it is known of in this digital age.

Mmmm .... 3024A, the 200MHz, I'm sorry kaz911 you run the gauntlet of scorn, there are many out there who know the emphatic truth of electronics ..... you only need 10MHz for 99.9% of the time, this statement is inherently incorrect ..... I hope you know this, in fact it is 99.99999999999% of the time, the other 100% of the time you need a 200MHz machine ..... preferably an Agilent.



now that is what I call a setup, very neat, do you think they have all been turned on .... lol

Your thoughts on power supplies, what I have been using to date could only be described as pre agricultural. I want to buy once and buy something that just works. Any ideas on multiple outputs as opposed to single outputs. Any thoughts on what I should add to my shiny test equipment collection.

I modified my previous posts so the nay sayers could count, possibly with one of their big shiny digital counters how many ways I can spend my money and not even make a dent in it. The austere life stye of Yorkshire seems so alluring to me right now .....NOT ..... lol.

[kaz911]

Single output is fine for most things.

Multiple output is nice for building amplifiers where you need +/- 15-25v (like the Agilent E3631a/Array E3631a and the Rigol DP1308a)

The Rigol's have "UI Sex appeal" - but we have not seen one on the inside. The Agilent is "old trusted" model - and you can find them for about the same price (Rigol $800 with shipping on ebay - Agilent $800-1200). Array E3631 have more "buttons" and seem to be the "OEM" that supplied Agilent with their E3631a (just read the Array manual - gives you the Agilent feeling)

I just took an offer on the Agilent MSOX-3024a I could not refuse. :-) I do not need the bandwidth very often - but the Scope is fully expanded with all options working - so I can work on CAN/I2C/SPI :-)  which I do. And since I move quite often - having everything in one box is convenient.  Now I am just waiting for the carry case and extended 5 year warranty with world wide cover - then I am happy. 

Where I live at the moment - distributors overcharge by anywhere from 25-50% - so even crap PSU's are expensive. So all I have at the moment is a crap PSU with 0.3 volt temperature drift and it never stabilizes.

[saturation]

Hi IC:

Sounds like a good position to be in.  For a PSU, linear for labs; cleanest output available.  Linear programmables not necessary unless you trade convenience and need for speed over cost, complexity, and slightly higher chance of failure: the history of simple linear PSU as reliable over decades is well known.  E3600 series by Agilent last forever.  Insure inputs floats properly so you can stack them series or parallel for more voltage or current, and instead of a single supply with multiple outputs, I use multiple single PSU,  for great options for output voltage and current, redundancy [ if one fails, I still have others available] and stack.  All are short circuit protected, and costant voltage/current capable.

On required frequency, a rule of 5 still holds, bandwidth of 5x your working frequency ... as it allows harmonics to be viewed when working with square waves.  But what actual limit really depends on the type of work you do; currently 100 MHz range is bang for buck now.  For example Rigol 1102e is $400/100MHz or $4/MHz.   If you follow that simple ratio a 20MHz scope should be $80, but its more like $250-$300, and above it, the ratio also changes.  Thus, 100 MHz isn't less by need, but more on cost efficiency.