Siglent SDS1102CML vs Rigol 1052

[a1976888]

Hi,
I'd like to buy my first oscilloscope. I'm looking for a cheap entry level model to start with electronics.
It seems that Rigol 1052 is really popular but I wonder how does it compare with Siglent 1102CML which sell for the same price, has larger display and is 100Mhz.
In 2014 do you still recommend Rigol one?
And what about Atten and Owon?
Thanks!

[saturation]

Yes, of those you mention Rigol has better materials and overall quality.

[rf-loop]

I do not know about Atten.

But I know quite well Rigol DS1052E, Siglent SDS1102CML  and some Owon models.

Absolutely best sampling quality and best TFT screen is in Owon. Also it have battery option. Previous some internal noise problem is solved and is same level as in these other two what I know.  Owon have FULL speed 10M memory for both channels.  It can do 1GSa/s down to 0.5ms/div (with samplerate it beats these other two totally.  Sampling fidelity is best, it do not use many separate ADC,s  interleeved system. Owon use single chip 2x500MSa/s ADC (same principle as Rigol DS2000) Also this advantage can see with Owon FFT what is Super if compare to this Rigol or Siglent model.
Siglent and Rigol have half speed 1 and 2M memory. (with long memory 500Msa/s is maximum.
Siglend have also 6M recorder memory for slow timebases.

Siglent have true dual timebase ALT.

Building quality is least as good as Rigol.  Siglent have extremely low noise fan.  Front panel encoders are least as good as in Rigol DS1000. Also Siglent have real glass (not glossy) front of TFT surface.
Perhaps it is not so beautiful caase but thiss is not quality question.  In use, feel of siglent is "Robust".
Also SDS1102CML is designed ready for 100MHz and no need any hack gaming joke.

But, honestly, this do not at all mean that Rigol DS1000E is crap in my opinion. It is still good nice scope. How I know Rigol. I have previously sold (and so also tested couple of)  Rigol's 
Rigol have shared vertical adjustments for both channels. Siglent and Owon have separate adjustments for both channels.

If I need set these order for very common entry level use and if prices aree nearly same then in this case.


Siglent. (but not oldest manufature versions in this serie )
Rigol   (but only due to perhaps cheapest price)
Owon  (most expensive, only newest versions is recommended (if seller do not exactly know his manufacture lot is free of problems) and there may be lot of older versions in some stocks - careful!)

but if have some special needs (signal sampling fidelity, maximal sample speed, very good 800x600 8" display, Battery ets... then Owon is perhaps over these two, also good to note that Owon beats clearly these two if look frequency bandwidth....)

[a1976888]

Thanks for your very complete answer!
With the new Rigol 1054Z out the choice is even more difficult... 

Actually I think the best quality/price goes to Siglent SDS1102CML. I found it as Sainsmart for 319.99$ and they offer a 20% discount code for halloween so the final price would be only 255.99$ with free shipping!

But I wonder that if a lot of people buy Rigol products there would be probably a good reason. And big user community means a lot of infos, supports, improvements, etc.

So I really have to decide if the 150$ difference for a 1054Z is worthy or not... 

[TheRevva]

The answer is that you should buy the best 'tool' that fits YOUR requirements.
Something you seem to have overlooked in that last post though...  The 1054Z is a FOUR channel scope (and that's a BIG deal to _some_ people)
From what we've seen on EEVBlog, all of the 1000Z series use the same hardware and use software centric bandwidth limiting.
If I could JUSTIFY a 'scope upgrade, I'd grab a 1054Z for sure, but since my ancient old 40MHz dual trace CRO does everything I NEED it to do, I'd rather spend my (highly limited) cash to grab equipment I don't yet have at all!

[saturation]

A simple test of equipment quality is checking for third party safety certification. 

In the USA, unless your gear is certified safe to use by any registered safety organization such as UL, TUV, NRTL, CSE etc., it cannot be used in a professional setting.

https://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/


Such a certificate doesn't mean the device will perform as well as the spec sheet says it will but the cost, effort, and design requirements to get certification is fairly involved.  Besides safety, the certification may also required other items related to safety, such as emissions.

ftp://ftp.ni.com/pub/devzone/tut/safety_cert_for_tmw.pdf


If a manufacturer bothers with such a certification its likely their total engineering are top quality in insuring their devices design, performance, and finally factory production methods, are essential top grade quality.

Note "CE" mark is worthless as safety rating, there are good pieces of gear without 3rd party safety certificates but its buyer beware, caveat emptor.

Rigol has always impressed me in that even the lowly 1052e is TUV Rhineland certified since 2008, and can be confirmed [ in case its counterfeit or fake mark] through the databases of the certifying body.



http://www.certipedia.com/certificates/72081808?locale=en




.. and now the new bang for buck DSO, 1054Z:

[a1976888]

Hi,
Actually what I do is almost only repairing devices. I only own some DMMs at the moment and very often I thought that having an oscilloscope would have help in troubleshooting and understanding on what was going on. I think that if you have an oscilloscope you will start to use it one day or another!
So I decided to pick one but I haven't enough space for a cheap analog one and I decided to buy a digital one. This is the story.

Now what I think is that probably it is better to buy something a bit more expensive but with lot of features that could be handy in the future than buy the cheapest one and probably regret it in one year or two.
I think also that Rigol scope are easy to sell if I don't need it anymore.
It's silly but in the end I really can't tell what I will do with my oscilloscope...