Hello,
no, without discount, the Batronix Magnova BMO200 costs € 4,758.81. The Batronix Magnova BMO350 would even cost € 5,948.81.
And if Batronix doesn't change anything, the price will apply from 1 October.
Best regards
egonotto
I admit I would not buy the Magnova at its full price.
On the other hand, the Micsig (you have) is not comparable in terms of math, fft,…
I think the magnova is way more performant in these fields, definitely when the scope really is a platform that Batronix will continue to finetune.
Hello,
yes, that's true, but if you buy a Siglent SDS804X HD in addition to the Micsig MHO3-2504, you might get more for your money.
Best regards
egonotto
All prices(incl. 19%VAT):
BMO100 3568.81€
BMO200 4758.81€
BMO350 5948.81€
Siglent SDS3000X HD:
SDS3034X HD 4022.20€
SDS3054X HD 5569.20€
SDS3104X HD 7116.20€
Rigol DHO4000:
DHO4204 3281.11€
DHO4404 4401.81€
DHO4804 5591.81€
These are the 12-bit competitors, at least in terms of price.
Whereby the Rigols are only listed for the sake of completeness.
And if Batronix doesn't change anything, the price will apply from 1 October.
Naaahh... I bet you the discount will be extended. At least until the comparisons with the Siglent 3k HD are clear.
And Xmas is coming...
And if Batronix doesn't change anything, the price will apply from 1 October.
Naaahh... I bet you the discount will be extended. At least until the comparisons with the Siglent 3k HD are clear.
And Xmas is coming...
So is Electronica.....who is going ?
Too far for me.....
If I have the time in November and can overcome my fear of flying, I would be there.
Batronix is next to Siglent and KS next to R&S (Hall A3)!
With some long probes, one could do lot of comparisons...
Why does Lecroy have such a small booth? And Tektronix seems to have an even smaller space.
I admit I would not buy the Magnova at its full price.
On the other hand, the Micsig (you have) is not comparable in terms of math, fft,…
I think the magnova is way more performant in these fields, definitely when the scope really is a platform that Batronix will continue to finetune.
Hello,
yes, that's true, but if you buy a Siglent SDS804X HD in addition to the Micsig MHO3-2504, you might get more for your money.
Best regards
egonotto
I already have an SDS2354X plus 500MHz.
There is no better way to illustrate the saying “light and shade lie close together”...
At the moment, I'm working with our new Lecroy WavePro MSO.
12 bits, 20 GSa/s, 1 Gpts of memory... And it's fast as hell.
Compared to a DHO4000, it's not just a matter of minor differences, it's a whole new world.
If I have the time in November and can overcome my fear of flying, I would be there.
Really, no better way to travel.....just make sure the boss coughs up for Business class tickets.....but go easy on the booze if you need to arrive fresh.
At the moment, I'm working with our new Lecroy WavePro MSO.
12 bits, 20 GSa/s, 1 Gpts of memory... And it's fast as hell.
For sure there will be a WaveMaster 16GHz with its 12-bits all the way... and the MAUI.
That's why they are away from the others... Hawaii is in the middle of the Pacific.
One last OT post from me:
The “small” one next to it is a 10” SDS2104Xplus...
Hello,
I haven't received my personal unit yet, but I’ve already had the chance to use one at work.
Unfortunately, I can’t take any photos because the Magnova is connected to an experimental plasma machine under an NDA.
That being said, my first impressions are very positive. The display is stunning, and the user interface is extremely responsive. The FFT is fast, even faster than our Tektronix MSO3 that we already have in the lab. Regarding trace thickness, I didn’t encounter the issue previously mentioned—traces are fine, as expected from a reputable oscilloscope brand.
However, a few remarks: the oscilloscope allows zooming down to a few picoseconds per division, which is a bit excessive for a device in this frequency range. It doesn’t have any practical physical relevance.
The probe ports seem designed for active probes, but nothing in the menus currently supports their full use. I wasn’t bothered by the side-mounted probe setup either.
You can switch between a dark mode and a light mode, which is always nice. However, Batronix currently doesn’t provide a platform to retrieve firmware updates, which is an area for improvement.
Personally, I had no issues using this device. Even though it's somewhat different from a classic oscilloscope, everything remains very intuitive.
A particularly appreciated feature: the ability to display measurements directly on the traces. This is a real plus, especially in a professional context where you may need to present results to people with diverse scientific backgrounds.
The statistics function is also a great addition. While the numerical values are the most useful, seeing the variation on a graph is a real bonus. As for the math functions, they cover a wide range of logical and mathematical operators. However, some functions are still missing, such as the absolute value, for instance.
Having experience purchasing scientific equipment, I can confidently say that, in this price range (with the current promotion), the Magnova offers more than any other oscilloscope. I’m very happy with my purchase and hope Batronix will provide regular updates to improve the software.
A few improvements would be welcome, such as the ability to split the screen for each channel or to adjust the font size. One of my colleagues, in his fifties, had difficulty reading the X and Y axis divisions.
Moreover, the arbitrary waveform generator accessory won’t be delivered until next May, so no Bode plot function until then.
It's worth noting that I’ve been using this oscilloscope in a physics research context, not purely for electronics.
One last OT post from me:
The “small” one next to it is a 10” SDS2104Xplus...
next iteration: they drop the screen completely and add a 60 inch UHD monitor…
One last OT post from me:
The “small” one next to it is a 10” SDS2104Xplus...
Intense screen difference from 15.6" with 1080p to 10.1* 600p and also a world of difference in pixels.
1920x1080p 2.073 mill 16:9
1024x600 614k pixels 16:9
So the use of a massive 15.6" FHD screen also in Magnova seems like a good fit, though a wider vertical aspect ratio like other 12bit scope vendors are using 16:10 (1920x1200) 2.3mill would have been preferred, and gain some more depth for those precious bits, instead of this media-wide 16:9 ratio.
Is it TFT or IPS screen that are used in Magnova?
However, a few remarks: the oscilloscope allows zooming down to a few picoseconds per division, which is a bit excessive for a device in this frequency range. It doesn’t have any practical physical relevance.
I don't mind that at all because that is a kind of measurement I do regulary. But it requires excellent trigger jitter performance (which is typically only found on very expensive scopes) in order to be useful.
However, a few remarks: the oscilloscope allows zooming down to a few picoseconds per division, which is a bit excessive for a device in this frequency range. It doesn’t have any practical physical relevance.
I don't mind that at all because that is a kind of measurement I do regulary. But it requires excellent trigger jitter performance (which is typically only found on very expensive scopes) in order to be useful.
Would the reason for this “good” performance be the consequence of the triggering being applied on the signal itself and not some second treatment/modified channel data ?
Sorry if I didn’t explain well…
Batronix mentioned somewhere this (particular ?) behaviour of their scope.
The probe ports seem designed for active probes, but nothing in the menus currently supports their full use.
Usually you can only “see” something when an active probe is connected, at least that's the case with Lecroy and Siglent.
For example, when I connect a LeCroy current probe, only then can I find a menu for it, for autozeroing and degaussing.
However, a few remarks: the oscilloscope allows zooming down to a few picoseconds per division, which is a bit excessive for a device in this frequency range. It doesn’t have any practical physical relevance.
I don't mind that at all because that is a kind of measurement I do regulary. But it requires excellent trigger jitter performance (which is typically only found on very expensive scopes) in order to be useful.
Would the reason for this “good” performance be the consequence of the triggering being applied on the signal itself and not some second treatment/modified channel data ?
Yes and no. There are several ways to implement triggering. Trigger jitter is a number which says how well an oscilloscope can overlay repetitive edges on top of eachother regardless of how the triggering is implemented.
If I have the time in November and can overcome my fear of flying, I would be there.
Just saw, that my company will also be there. Maybe I can overcome my fear to wear a suit
