| Products > Test Equipment |
| A review of the GWInstek 1054B |
| << < (5/16) > >> |
| tautech:
A screenshot captured on a USB stick is much more helpful and clear for those following than something like this: :-- |
| saturation:
Sorry, mea culpa, I have them but didn't have time to take it out; will replace that photo with the screen grab. --- Quote from: tautech on December 16, 2016, 02:25:41 pm ---A screenshot captured on a USB stick is much more helpful and clear for those following than something like this: :-- --- End quote --- |
| saturation:
I agree with nctnico as is any instability of the waveform can be seen with the defaults as it is today, its just less starkly contrasted. So its practically not an issue, its more usability and a way to see such events better. The spec sheet states that the screen supports 256 shades, it looks less than half that so it can easily be improved. The Rigol 1054z traces are only 64 grey shades. IIRC. I think over time some improvements in usability would help, but they have put a lot of good work into its measurements fidelity and being bug free. As example of added peculiar usability decisions in 1054B, the statistics function begins at n = 2 samples. :o Rotate the encoder to increase or decrease up to n= 1000 where it stops. If they let it simply cycle back to 2 it would save 1/2 the time to get n = 500 and it would be instant to get n = 1000, for the best analysis possible, code wise that is faster to implement than adding a coarse and fine, which would make it even speedier. That said and aside, the numbers it generates are superb. --- Quote from: nctnico on December 16, 2016, 01:55:32 pm --- --- Quote from: wraper on December 16, 2016, 12:39:06 pm --- --- Quote from: saturation on December 16, 2016, 12:23:08 pm ---I think if zero intensity were made truly zero it will help a lot, it would give the adjust for 'contrast' a greater span and act much more like a true CRT intensity adjust. --- End quote --- And what is practical use for it? --- End quote --- None. Actually it is rather counter productive to want to have a dim (invisible) signal on a DSO! Fortunately GW Instek didn't hop on the 'emulate a CRO display' band wagon but went the practical way instead by starting at (approx.) 50% intensity and go from there. Ofcourse you can turn the trace intensity down to invisible. --- End quote --- |
| whited:
Saturation, I have a little more time now to see your numbers; seems 1050B has ~70 MHz bandwidth instead of its rated 50 MHz. It is not too surprising but nice to see in a budget scope. I wonder if all GDS 1000B and 2000E have similar conservative bandwidth rating? Maybe ntcnico can give another datapoint on frequency response? ntcnico I read your review thread; I hope I didn't miss it. Nevermind I found it here on post #67 https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gw-instek-gds2204e-(200mhz-4-channel-dso)-review/?all It's a good measurement showing 2204E roll off (rated 200MHz bandwidth) -3dB @ 290MHz with 50mV/div, more steep curve -3dB @ 210MHz with 10mV/div, more gradual curve I am personally thinking 2070E is a sweet spot @ $920... but 2204E is so close @ $1256. Can I convince myself? :) I know this is a 1054B thread - I try to keep it relevant. Thanks to you all. --- Quote from: whited on December 16, 2016, 02:04:52 pm ---Yes this makes more sense. Above I missed memory segmentation in my 2000E diff list. You mentioned it too. I am adding to my list (since it's there, so I don't forget). --- Quote from: saturation on December 16, 2016, 03:18:03 am ---Welcome, I've had some for a while never posted. I'm not sure if my FM generator is good past 25 MHz; Vo likely drops with higher frequency. Here's a crude frequency response curve I generated some time back and never posted. This is the raw dBVpp and dBV using the DSO's native RMS calculator. Its consistent with a typical -6dB/octave low pass filter with 66 MHz at -3dB point. Response from a Tek 284 pulse generator. Between 6ns and 3 ns, called it 4.5ns or 0.35/4.5 = 78 MHz, consistent with the frequency test. --- Quote from: whited on December 16, 2016, 01:13:05 am ---Glad you are sharing screenshots, saturation. Is source waveform amplitude the same for all 3 carrier frequencies? It looks like -40dbv attenuation from 1MHz to 75MHz? That's a lot. Or maybe it's happening before the scope or I am missing something? Instek has not yet replied regarding serial decode app for 1000B. It has only been 1 day though. Perhaps there is not enough memory as mentioned. --- End quote --- --- End quote --- --- End quote --- |
| saturation:
The 1054B is <$366 street price via Tequipment not including the eevblog discounts and possibly other promotions. At the published bandwidth and list price they are about the same proportion, 50 MHz vs 200 MHz is still 4x more at 4x the price as well as serial decodes and segmented memory. However, its in the extreme end, the usable bandwidth were you can get more. Its likely to still go past 500 MHz based on the curve slope at its more sensitive vertical amp setting. So the big question is do you need that much bandwidth to pay more for it? Or in the end its all part of happy holidays? :-+ --- Quote from: whited on December 16, 2016, 04:40:59 pm ---Saturation, I have a little more time now to see your numbers; seems 1050B has ~70 MHz bandwidth instead of its rated 50 MHz. It is not too surprising but nice to see in a budget scope. I wonder if all GDS 1000B and 2000E have similar conservative bandwidth rating? Maybe ntcnico can give another datapoint on frequency response? ntcnico I read your review thread; I hope I didn't miss it. Nevermind I found it here on post #67 https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gw-instek-gds2204e-(200mhz-4-channel-dso)-review/?all It's a good measurement showing 2204E roll off (rated 200MHz bandwidth) -3dB @ 290MHz with 50mV/div, more steep curve -3dB @ 210MHz with 10mV/div, more gradual curve I am personally thinking 2070E is a sweet spot @ $920... but 2204E is so close @ $1256. Can I convince myself? :) I know this is a 1054B thread - I try to keep it relevant. Thanks to you all. --- End quote --- |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |