Hi,
I'm going to buy my first scope. Just found those two for the same price (more or less). What I need is versatility. I'd like to use it in all of my interests: arduino, cnc, electronics in general, etc. I pray the experts to give a look at their characteristics and tell me something "to show me the way"
Thanks in advance
tell us the key specs of the two and what you want to do with your choice of scope
IIRC Atten made clones of the Rigol. I'm not sure this is the model line Rigol litigated Atten for. The specs are very close.
Atten does not have the reputation of Rigol, at least for this model range.
Separated at birth?
Rigol is a known quantity with pretty good quality (for the price), with lots of reviews and experiences available. Atten not so much. This alone would tilt the scale in the direction of Rigol for me. The fact that they were sued successfully by Rigol for copying their design doesn't help their reputation, either.
There seems to be some confusion about the memory depth. The features list specifies 4k for the ADS1000 series and 2M for the ADS1000M series. The table below lists 1M/2M for all ADS1000CA models. In the datasheet (catalog), it specifies 40kpts memory depth, max recording length 6M, and 1M/2M in the table. Specs at the end list 20k/40k again. Reminds me of the Uni-T scope.
No manual available for download. Attempting to download the ADS1000 catalog appears to return a Chinese 404. The Rigol documentation is not great in my opinion, but the Atten documentation may be even worse if it was written by the same person as the Atten website.
The 1.2Mohm input impedance with AC coupling below 100mV/div seems a bit dodgy (would introduce 20% error with a 10x probe at lower frequencies). Noise spec doesn't seem great, although I can't find a similar spec for the Rigol scope, so I'm not sure how it compares. 40% tolerance for the 20MHz BW limit seems pretty bad.
Most of the possible issues will not be reflected in the datasheet: if it actually meets the specs (not too convinced about that, even for the Rigol), the UI, responsiveness, durability, support (not Rigol's strong point either). But it may actually be better than the Rigol, I don't think anyone has done a review yet.
looking at the two it does rather look like atten copied rigol while trying to not make it look like they had. Yes a 1.2 Mohm input impedence is going to well screw things unless they have accounted for it in the design.
you also want to check the sample rate of that Atten, analogue bandwidth alone is not a good indicator. The rigol achieved a 250% overclock on it's 10 ADC's taking the total from what would have been 400 MS/s to a wopping (for the price tag) 1000 MS/s (1 GS/s), what does the atten score ? Rigol certainly had to do their homework on that one to pull it off without a hitch. without the overclock the rigol would be goot up to 40MHz only on single shot sweeps
Thanks to all. Your comments drive me on rigol direction, but....100mhz vs 50mhz: where and when 50mhz difference could be really appreciated??
but....100mhz vs 50mhz: where and when 50mhz difference could be really appreciated??
when you want to measure something over 50 MHz ! only you know what you want to measure with it
but....100mhz vs 50mhz: where and when 50mhz difference could be really appreciated??
when you want to measure something over 50 MHz ! only you know what you want to measure with it
It's not that simple. Oscilloscope bandwidth should be 3-5x signal frequency for analog frequency, and 3-5x or so edge rate (1/5th-1/3rd of the rise time) for digital signals, to get a reasonable representation. The bandwidth is the -3dB point, so measuring a 50MHz sine with a 50MHz scope would give you a reading that's about 30% low, and any higher harmonics will be severely attenuated. More bandwidth is better, other things being equal. That said, for a beginner, 50MHz should be quite sufficient.
yes your right you'd want a higher speed than your measuring
but....100mhz vs 50mhz: where and when 50mhz difference could be really appreciated??
when you want to measure something over 50 MHz ! only you know what you want to measure with it
It's not that simple. Oscilloscope bandwidth should be 3-5x signal frequency for analog frequency, and 3-5x or so edge rate (1/5th-1/3rd of the rise time) for digital signals, to get a reasonable representation. The bandwidth is the -3dB point, so measuring a 50MHz sine with a 50MHz scope would give you a reading that's about 30% low, and any higher harmonics will be severely attenuated. More bandwidth is better, other things being equal. That said, for a beginner, 50MHz should be quite sufficient.
For example:working with diy tube amp or testing I/O ports logic signals could be frustated by a lower bw?
yes because essentially a square wave is made up of many frequencies that get smaller as they go up in frequency (harmonics) so to see the whole of the square wave you need like 5-10x the badwidth or your square wave will come out as a sineish wave
Thanks to all. Your comments drive me on rigol direction, but....100mhz vs 50mhz: where and when 50mhz difference could be really appreciated??
Did I miss something? Why isn't the 50 to 100MHz mod considered?
Thanks to all. Your comments drive me on rigol direction, but....100mhz vs 50mhz: where and when 50mhz difference could be really appreciated??
Did I miss something? Why isn't the 50 to 100MHz mod considered?
some say new firmware could not make mod possible....is it really true?
Today I've got a good offer for this Owon model MSO5022S:
http://www.owon.com.cn/eng/mso.asp16chs logic analizer could be useful for me, but I'm still mumbling about 25mhz bw and Sample rate(Real time) 100MS/s seems to be not very good....
Any opinion??
some say new firmware could not make mod possible....is it really true?
Today I've got a good offer for this Owon model MSO5022S: http://www.owon.com.cn/eng/mso.asp
16chs logic analizer could be useful for me, but I'm still mumbling about 25mhz bw and Sample rate(Real time) 100MS/s seems to be not very good....
Any opinion??
I believe there are some reports that suggest that the new version may block the mod, not exactly surprising in my opinion.
25MHz is definitely inferior to Rigol/Instek, and 100MS/s is effective only about 10MHz single-shot (with bonus of extra aliasing). My impression of Owen (not having seen one in person) is that it's a definite step down from Rigol, and Rigol is a step down from the more expensive Agilent/Lecroy/Tek scopes (excluding the re-badged Rigols/Attens).
Logic analyzer can be useful, but I believe the reviews of the Rigol logic analyzer option on RCgroups weren't that positive, so I'm not sure how usable it is compared to a stand-alone USB logic analyzer.
Thanks ALM!!! Your answer is very helpful. I think I'm going to point to rigol definitively. What do you mena with re-badged rigol/atten?
Some of the low end Agilent scopes are basically re-badged Rigol scopes with a few firmware modifications (which is how the Rigol name got known). I've seen some reports that low-end Lecroy scopes are made by Atten, but haven't verified this. These instruments obviously won't be (much) better than their Rigol/Atten cousins. You'd have to move up in their line (probably a few thousand dollars) to get significantly better quality. Not sure about the low-end Teks, I think they're their own design and may have a superior analog and ADC circuit, but have pretty limited record length.