Best Oscilloscope under $300?

[theaustindixon]

I'm planning on taking some electronics courses in the fall, and I'd like to get a budget oscilloscope (hopefully under $300) for practicing at home. Looking around online, I see these options:

New:

• Hantek DSO5102P
• Siglent SDS1052DL
• Rigol DHO800

Used:

• Siglent SDS1202X-E
• Rigol DS1052E
• Tektronix TDS2012

Any reason to buy one of these over the others?

[tautech]

Any reason to buy one of these over the others?

USB screenshot capability especially for a novice where you can capture waveform screenshots and present them to a mentor for advice/guidance.

The new SDS802X HD will be priced close to your budget.

[tggzzz]

Make sure you leave sufficient budget for the other items you will need. Bench power supply. Multimeters. Soldering iron. Scope probes. 4mm banana flying lead. Signal generator. Hook up wire and copperclad (unetched) PCB, or stripboard. A basic component kit. Diagonal cutters and pliers.

If you are considering second-hand equipment, then you can get scopes much much cheaper than $300; just make sure it is working.

All equipment has a learning curve, which means a beginner is often better served by having simple easily understood equipment. Beginners should be learning fundamental electronics, not spending too much time on the GUI of one manufacturers 2024 entry level equipment.

A good engineer will always be looking for simple easy ways to do the job. Once upon a time recording a scope trace required Polaroid cameras or pen plotters. Now the simplest and fastest way to record the complete experimental setup and all measurements is with a phone or digital camera (ah, bliss. The past wasn't always golden

[baldurn]

Used always depends on what you can find. New however I would only consider Rigol DHO800 or Siglent SDS800X HD. The Siglent will be released in about a week, so wait for pricing on that before deciding.

Those two are the newest tech and while you probably won't actually need the signature feature of 12 bits, there simply is no reason not to play with the most recent iteration of a DSO. Unless you are on a tight budget and want to spent significantly less by going used.

[abeyer]

I'm planning on taking some electronics courses in the fall, and I'd like to get a budget oscilloscope (hopefully under $300)

Given that's a while away still, if you don't have an urgent need now, you might consider waiting:

• You might decide you want to get (or not!) the same brand/model you use in school
• School might suggest something and/or be able to get you a discount
• The new 12 bit models will have shaken out a bit by then
• It gives you some time to possibly save up a bit and look at a slightly higher price point... $300 is a cap that seems like it's hard to stay under without making some compromises you probably wouldn't if you look up to even just $400ish. (of course there's always a more sparkly bit of test equipment... but this price bracket in particular seems like it brings some pretty noticeable trade-offs that you might not otherwise have to make.)

[Fungus]

It's hard to define "best" but the Rigol DHO800 is easily the "least-dinosaur" of that list.

All the others are antiques by comparison.

[Aldo22]

(hopefully under $300) ...

• Rigol DHO800

If you find a Rigol DHO800 for less than $300, please let me know.

[tggzzz]

It's hard to define "best" but the Rigol DHO800 is easily the "least-dinosaur" of that list.

All the others are antiques by comparison.

With skill and imagination[2], you can do a heck of a lot with simple old equipment that is working. Developing such skill and imagination is very useful for any beginner, especially one that aspires to be a competent engineer.[1]

Simple equipment allows beginners to concentrate on the fundamentals, and not be distracted by chrome-plated buttons hiding complex subtle functions.

So, yes - it is hard to define "best".

[1] valuable in a career too. What scope can you use to develop the world's fastest scope? How can you measure X when you don't have the budget for a dedicated X-tester, or the lead time is too long due to your company's internal processes? Sit there and whine?

[2] see my .sig

[baldurn]

Simple equipment allows beginners to concentrate on the fundamentals, and not be distracted by chrome-plated buttons hiding complex subtle functions.

It can also be limiting. Say you need to decode a SPI signal from your Arduino - all beginner level stuff. But you took the advice of getting an old boat anchor CRO because simple is better. The skill and imagination needed to find a different solution is something you do not have yet, and it is getting in the way of what you are actually trying to learn right now. Many beginners might just give up.

You also do not want to deal with aliasing and other garbage produced by the instrument itself. This is a real risk if you get the very cheapest digital handheld scopes, with limited bandwidth and sample rates and specs that are lies. The advanced learner may know about these thing and use skill+imagination to work around it. The beginner may become confused and give up.

[nctnico]

Agreed about decoding and buying a modern day DSO. But if you need/want a general purpose oscilloscope that actually works as advertised, you'll need 10 times the budget. Decoding is not a strong point on Rigol and Siglent scopes (can Hantek / Owon even do decoding?) and it is not unheard of a firmware update breaks a feature which was previously working. Something has got to give. Last week I visited an electronics lab at an university. They had a whole bunch of Tektronix educational oscilloscopes. IIRC Keysight has a similar offering. It could be worthwhile to see if these scopes can be purchased used or at a university discount. The specs may not look stellar on paper but having an instrument which just works as advertised is extremely helpfull (almost priceless). As a beginner you are dealing with enough unknowns as it is.

[Aldo22]

(can Hantek / Owon even do decoding?)

Not sure about DSO5102P, but the cheaper DSO2C10 can do decoding (very basic, but for $130....)

[Caliaxy]

(can Hantek / Owon even do decoding?)

Not sure about DSO5102P, but the cheaper DSO2C10 can do decoding (very basic, but for $130....)

DSO5102P doesn't.

[tggzzz]

Simple equipment allows beginners to concentrate on the fundamentals, and not be distracted by chrome-plated buttons hiding complex subtle functions.

It can also be limiting. Say you need to decode a SPI signal from your Arduino - all beginner level stuff. But you took the advice of getting an old boat anchor CRO because simple is better. The skill and imagination needed to find a different solution is something you do not have yet, and it is getting in the way of what you are actually trying to learn right now. Many beginners might just give up.

You also do not want to deal with aliasing and other garbage produced by the instrument itself. This is a real risk if you get the very cheapest digital handheld scopes, with limited bandwidth and sample rates and specs that are lies. The advanced learner may know about these thing and use skill+imagination to work around it. The beginner may become confused and give up.

I entirely agree about "strange" effects with digitising scopes. They occur even with more capable/reputable equipment but the effects are more subtle. Classic example is using a repetitive sampling mode to look at a digital transition, where the scope insists on drawing a line between successive samples. Misleading doesn't begin to describe it! (Yes HP,/Agilent I'm lookng at you!)

I wonder how we managed with digital signals before digitising scopes were available? Oh yes, we made the stimulus repeatable (always and still a good idea for many many reasons!) or used a analogue storage scope (horrible things !)

Where that isn't possible, use a scope to look at the analogue waveforms to ensure they will be correctly interpreted as digital signals (i.e. signal integrity). Then, for digital signals, flip to the digital domain with very inexpensive logic analysers or use a protocol analyser such as a bus pirate.

[tggzzz]

The specs may not look stellar on paper but having an instrument which just works as advertised is extremely helpfull (almost priceless). As a beginner you are dealing with enough unknowns as it is.

Precisely!

[Demon Xanth]

(hopefully under $300) ...

• Rigol DHO800

If you find a Rigol DHO800 for less than $300, please let me know.

Here you go:
https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DHO802/Digital-Oscilloscopes/

[Aldo22]

Here you go:
https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DHO802/Digital-Oscilloscopes/

Yes, that looks good.
Unfortunately not for me... 

[Demon Xanth]

That shipping price is a "please don't" price. 

[baldurn]

I wonder how we managed with digital signals before digitising scopes were available? Oh yes, we made the stimulus repeatable (always and still a good idea for many many reasons!) or used a analogue storage scope (horrible things !)

Where that isn't possible, use a scope to look at the analogue waveforms to ensure they will be correctly interpreted as digital signals (i.e. signal integrity). Then, for digital signals, flip to the digital domain with very inexpensive logic analysers or use a protocol analyser such as a bus pirate.

I am not saying that it is a problem to work with the old tech. But unless your interest lies specifically in learning how things was done in the past, I am arguing that the beginner is better of using a modern entry level DSO from a reputable vendor (and specifically the Rigol DHO800 or Siglent SDS800X HD). Those instruments are not perfect, but good enough to avoid most surprises and with a good range of features. It is something you will be able to keep for many years before possibly outgrowing the instrument.

Older A brand instruments may also be good options. The problem is that the beginner has no way to know if he is getting a good deal or not. There is a lot of overpriced and outdated stuff out there.

I am advising against going too cheap. The new stuff that is significantly cheaper than the before mentioned Rigol and Siglent is often "too cheap". If you are on a budget and need to make ends meet, I would say you need to go the used route. Yes that might even include an old CRO, because any instruments is better than no instrument.

[ebastler]

I recommend that you look for a 4-channel scope. Much more flexible than two channels; among other things they are capable of looking at (and decoding!) serial buses like SPI, with clock, data, enable, command/data lines.

With the recent or upcoming launch of new 12-bit entry-level scopes (Rigol DHO800 and Siglent SDS800X HD series), I would expect that the previous generation of 8-bit entry-level models increasingly show up on the used market. That would be the Rigol DS1xx4Z and the Siglent SDS1xx4X-E. They currently start at around $400 new, hence should become available for $300 or less used. I would prefer either of these over the other "used" models you have looked at.

[Smepic]

Rigol DS1054Z is 299€ on https://eleshop.eu/catalog/product/view/id/625/s/rigol-ds1054z/category/82/

It is quite reliable, or at least its bugs are well known.

[KungFuJosh]

Rigol DS1054Z is 299€ on https://eleshop.eu/catalog/product/view/id/625/s/rigol-ds1054z/category/82/

It is quite reliable, or at least its bugs are well known.

Ewww! No. Don't waste money on a 10 year old scope. There's MUCH better options out from both Rigol and Siglent, including a new scope being release this month from Siglent that should be competitive near that price.

[Fungus]

If you find a Rigol DHO800 for less than $300, please let me know.

Here you go:
https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DHO802/Digital-Oscilloscopes/

You might regret only getting two channels though, especially if you have any interest at all in microcontrollers and other digital electronics.

[Fungus]

Rigol DS1054Z is 299€ on https://eleshop.eu/catalog/product/view/id/625/s/rigol-ds1054z/category/82/

It is quite reliable, or at least its bugs are well known.

The DHO800 doesn't have enough bugs to justify getting a DS1054Z. Almost every feature is better and easier to use on the DHO.

IMHO the whole "bugs" thing is massively overstated on the DHO. There's half a dozen annoyances that you need to watch out for, nothing that stops you getting things done.

Focus on the pluses instead: The compact size, the touch screen, the readability of the text, windowing, WiFi, etc. are such HUGE advantages over those others that there's no way I'd trade in my DHO for anything on that list.

[MT]

Anyone who buys 2ch scopes today dont know what they are doing and should instead become a nurse or something.

[mwb1100]

I’m not sure I should be suggesting the following since I have never used one and there have been a number of complaints on eevblog about it, but for its price it seems like something that could be considered as a beginner scope:  the Hantek DSO2D10.  Also the review posts aren’t always 100% negative - and it seems that there’s a lot of help available on eevblog too.

You can get one on Amazon for $200 (after an 8%off coupon is applied by checking a box).  It also comes with a signal generator which would be useful in school labs.

However, the OP should check the various threads here to see if the potential negatives might be too much of a risk.

Another option that might be considered is getting a used Digilent Analog Discovery on eBay.  The oscilloscope doesn’t have high bandwidth, but it’s likely good enough for most school projects.  Also  the AD has a ton of various devices that would be useful in educational labs.  New ones would be out of price range, but used ones seem to go for around $150.  A v1 model should be nearly as useful as a v2 or later model, and those are on eBay all the time.

[Aldo22]

I’m not sure I should be suggesting the following since I have never used one and there have been a number of complaints on eevblog about it, but for its price it seems like something that could be considered as a beginner scope:  the Hantek DSO2D10.  Also the review posts aren’t always 100% negative - and it seems that there’s a lot of help available on eevblog too.

You can get one on Amazon for $200 (after an 8%off coupon is applied by checking a box).  It also comes with a signal generator which would be useful in school labs.

If you want to buy a Hantek DSO2X1X, then take the cheapest DSO2C10, they are all the same in terms of hardware. I got mine for $130 and it's worth that.
There are a few flaws, but you still get a hell of a lot for the money.
Lots of features. I'd actually recommend it for learning oscilloscopes.
If you just want to learn electronics and just want the scope to work without having to deal with it too much, it might not be the best.
But the price is an unbeatable argument. You can always buy a more expensive one later, once you've got an idea of what it's all about and what you really need.
You can't even get a decent "boat anchor" for this price here.

[tggzzz]

I wonder how we managed with digital signals before digitising scopes were available? Oh yes, we made the stimulus repeatable (always and still a good idea for many many reasons!) or used a analogue storage scope (horrible things !)

Where that isn't possible, use a scope to look at the analogue waveforms to ensure they will be correctly interpreted as digital signals (i.e. signal integrity). Then, for digital signals, flip to the digital domain with very inexpensive logic analysers or use a protocol analyser such as a bus pirate.

I am not saying that it is a problem to work with the old tech. But unless your interest lies specifically in learning how things was done in the past, I am arguing that the beginner is better of using a modern entry level DSO from a reputable vendor (and specifically the Rigol DHO800 or Siglent SDS800X HD). Those instruments are not perfect, but good enough to avoid most surprises and with a good range of features. It is something you will be able to keep for many years before possibly outgrowing the instrument.

Older A brand instruments may also be good options. The problem is that the beginner has no way to know if he is getting a good deal or not. There is a lot of overpriced and outdated stuff out there.

I am advising against going too cheap. The new stuff that is significantly cheaper than the before mentioned Rigol and Siglent is often "too cheap". If you are on a budget and need to make ends meet, I would say you need to go the used route. Yes that might even include an old CRO, because any instruments is better than no instrument.

We more or less agree, but...

I don't think a beginner should be concentrating on learning any tool. They should be concentrating on the operation of their electronic circuit. Tools change with monotonous regularity; physics lasts a lifetime

If budget is an issue, then old scopes are virtually free nowadays. Provided they are working, they will enable a beginner to learn a hell of a lot, and when their capabilities have been exhausted throwing it away will only "lose" $20 or so! At that point the beginner will know what they need and can ensure their next instrument (scope or otherwise) is suitable.

And for the price of a new Rigol etc, you can get an extremely capable older scope plus a logic analyser plus.... (Major exception: capturing single shot events),

BTW I'm glad nobody is suggesting digitizing scope that were low end professional scopes before, say, 2010. Those digitizing scopes are uniformly awful (capture depth, aliasing, etc).

[mwb1100]

If you want to buy a Hantek DSO2X1X, then take the cheapest DSO2C10, they are all the same in terms of hardware.

Cheapest I can find (admittedly not an extensive search) was $150.  The sig gen isn't "included" with the DSO2C10, but my understanding is that the sig gen hardware is sometimes (often?) installed and can be enabled with a bit of hacking.

You are right to point out that model and the fact that there are vendors cheaper than Amazon.

[Aldo22]

Cheapest I can find (admittedly not an extensive search) was $150. 

I bought mine in a christmas promotion.
I think $150 is still okay, but I wouldn't pay much more. There should be a reasonable difference to the price range of a Rigol or Siglent, which are of course higher quality (I assume).

The sig gen isn't "included" with the DSO2C10, but my understanding is that the sig gen hardware is sometimes (often?) installed and can be enabled with a bit of hacking.

Yes, I think nowadays you have to be very unlucky if you get one without the AWG hardware.
I wouldn't even call it "hacking". It's very simple and safe.

The scope has so many features, it's like a book on oscilloscopes. You open a new chapter every day. 
I find it suitable for beginners, not for professionals.

[Muxr]

Anyone who buys 2ch scopes today dont know what they are doing and should instead become a nurse or something.

I don't think this is as big of a handicap. Like what percentage of times do you really use more than 2 channels? Half the time I'm too lazy to setup 3+ probes on the scope, I just move the probe if I need to see another signal. And with digital scopes you can store the traces if you need to compare things. And with all the triggering options available you can get the similar result.

Like sure 4ch is nice, and everyone should probably get a 4ch scope as it doesn't cost too much to get the extra 2ch. But if budget doesn't permit, 2ch will be absolutely fine.

I dunno, maybe because I started on a 2ch scope, I learned to work around the limitation, but I certainly would be fine with a 2ch scope, if that meant I can also buy a decent multimiter or another piece of important equipment needed to start my hobby lab.

[Atlan]

Purely theoretically, a 2-channel oscilloscope on channel three, because it is a trigger input.

[tggzzz]

Anyone who buys 2ch scopes today dont know what they are doing and should instead become a nurse or something.

I don't think this is as big of a handicap. Like what percentage of times do you really use more than 2 channels? Half the time I'm too lazy to setup 3+ probes on the scope, I just move the probe if I need to see another signal. And with digital scopes you can store the traces if you need to compare things. And with all the triggering options available you can get the similar result.

Like sure 4ch is nice, and everyone should probably get a 4ch scope as it doesn't cost too much to get the extra 2ch. But if budget doesn't permit, 2ch will be absolutely fine.

I dunno, maybe because I started on a 2ch scope, I learned to work around the limitation, but I certainly would be fine with a 2ch scope, if that meant I can also buy a decent multimiter or another piece of important equipment needed to start my hobby lab.

Just so.

Learn to use your skill and imagination - something that's important in any engineering job. (An engineer is someone that can do something for $1 that any fool can do for $5)

Besides, decent probes aren't cheap. Probes frequently needed by amateurs cost several hundred $/£/etc. Some professional probes cost several month's salary

[Aldo22]

If budget is an issue, then old scopes are virtually free nowadays.
...
Provided they are working,

Maybe in England, but here you can't get anything in working order for less than ~100.-
If you buy it online, you have no idea what you're getting.
I really don't think a beginner should start with such an old piece of equipment. Does a beginner even recognize the faults?
For me, it's also out of question because they are too big and too heavy. You need space on the desk and a healthy back for these.
No thanks! 

[nctnico]

I don't think a beginner should be concentrating on learning any tool. They should be concentrating on the operation of their electronic circuit. Tools change with monotonous regularity;

And for the price of a new Rigol etc, you can get an extremely capable older scope plus a logic analyser plus.... (Major exception: capturing single shot events),

You are contradicting your own logic here  Tools change and what was useful yesterday, is less useful today. There ain't no such thing as an extremely capable older scope. Logic analyser is the same story; Tektronix (and maybe Keysight as well) has even stopped making these as nobody has a use for a logic analyser nowadays. Modern day oscilloscopes have become super versatile and for somebody at the beginning of their career, it makes sense to start with today's technology as much as financially possible.

The other day I read an article about 2 interns (studying fine woodworking) who where working on restoring old ships. Great fun but none of the crafts/wood joining methods used to build old ships is used today.

[vk6zgo]

I don't think a beginner should be concentrating on learning any tool. They should be concentrating on the operation of their electronic circuit. Tools change with monotonous regularity;

And for the price of a new Rigol etc, you can get an extremely capable older scope plus a logic analyser plus.... (Major exception: capturing single shot events),

You are contradicting your own logic here  Tools change and what was useful yesterday, is less useful today. There ain't no such thing as an extremely capable older scope. Logic analyser is the same story; Tektronix (and maybe Keysight as well) has even stopped making these as nobody has a use for a logic analyser nowadays. Modern day oscilloscopes have become super versatile and for somebody at the beginning of their career, it makes sense to start with today's technology as much as financially possible.

The other day I read an article about 2 interns (studying fine woodworking) who where working on restoring old ships. Great fun but none of the crafts/wood joining methods used to build old ships is used today.

There are still a lot of applications for a good analog 'scope, but they are not the things DSOs are good at.
Analog circuitry is like  "the ghost at the feast"  & still comes back to haunt us.

[tggzzz]

If budget is an issue, then old scopes are virtually free nowadays.
...
Provided they are working,

Maybe in England, but here you can't get anything in working order for less than ~100.-
If you buy it online, you have no idea what you're getting.
I really don't think a beginner should start with such an old piece of equipment. Does a beginner even recognize the faults?
For me, it's also out of question because they are too big and too heavy. You need space on the desk and a healthy back for these.
No thanks! 

Well, Switzerland has always been excessively expensive (except for cuckoo clocks  )

Big and heavy? Bigger and heavier, yes, but absolute values matter as much as relative values. While some justifiably deserve the term "boatanchor", I've used digitising scopes that were marked "two person lift".

You need a trusted source of any old equipment, e.g. a car or house

[Fungus]

Like sure 4ch is nice, and everyone should probably get a 4ch scope as it doesn't cost too much to get the extra 2ch. But if budget doesn't permit, 2ch will be absolutely fine.

I assume you all drive Smart cars then?

2 seats is enough to move any number of people, you just have to make more trips...

[tggzzz]

I don't think a beginner should be concentrating on learning any tool. They should be concentrating on the operation of their electronic circuit. Tools change with monotonous regularity;

And for the price of a new Rigol etc, you can get an extremely capable older scope plus a logic analyser plus.... (Major exception: capturing single shot events),

You are contradicting your own logic here  Tools change and what was useful yesterday, is less useful today. There ain't no such thing as an extremely capable older scope.

You need to come into the modern world, and not be stuck with decades old technology 100MHz was just about adequate 40 years ago with LSTTL logic. 100MHz became outdated in the late 80s. Modern jellybean logic has sub-nanosecond risetimes.

The 24x5 scopes are very good, have 50ohm inputs, and higher bandwidth . The 485 has even higher bandwidth, if you can get hold of one.

Logic analyser is the same story; Tektronix (and maybe Keysight as well) has even stopped making these as nobody has a use for a logic analyser nowadays.

That's a very weak argument. Tek/HPAK have never made equipment for beginners.

Tek/HPAK stopped making LAs for reasons that are irrelevant to beginners: FPGAs and multi Gb/s baud rates are standard and attaching LAs to those is "interesting".

Haven't you noticed the very cheap devices that are readily available? They have limitations, just like all tools, but they are usable for many purposes.

Modern day oscilloscopes have become super versatile and for somebody at the beginning of their career, it makes sense to start with today's technology as much as financially possible.

A beginner should learn the fundamentals of the technology that will last a lifetime.

The other day I read an article about 2 interns (studying fine woodworking) who where working on restoring old ships. Great fun but none of the crafts/wood joining methods used to build old ships is used today.

If those interns are aiming to be technicians assembling houses, you are probably correct.

But if they are aiming to become engineers then a sound knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses (literally!) of different types of timber is likely to be useful. Using the old techniques might be useful.

Directly relevant electronics example... Look at the "old primitive" topologies of radio receivers and transmitters. Then look at the topologies of microwave and terahertz radios. They are very very similar. The reason isn't hard to understand: in both cases the RF components are pushed to the limits of their capabilities.

[tatel]

My 2 cents:

a) OP seems to be looking for a decent oscilloscope to buy it and forget about buying another one for years to come. I think it's a sensible approach, with just one caveat: I would spend a hundred bucks more to get a 4-channel one, quite probably one of the new/coming Rigol/Siglent -unless OP is sure he will never do any digital work. In that case a 2-channel one could be fine. But I find that probability is quite small as of today, so I would really go for a 4.channel device.

b) If budget is really tight, and considering there are other tools that come really handy, I would get the really cheap way and accept the shortcomings unavoidable on cheap oscilloscopes. That way there will be some remaining money to buy some of these other tools.

On the cheap toyscopes available today, I can't see too much value on 2-channel oscilloscopes unable to substract one channel from the other, and real performance is usually worse than the published specs. So:

b1) I would get the really cheap ZeeWeii DSO154Pro, just one channel and useable bandwidth just around 10 MHz, but enough to learn quite a bunch of things and able to remain useful to do field work in the future, say looking at his car waveforms, etc. Probably less than 50 bucks.

b2) a second cheap option would be to get an old 2-channel, 20-50 MHz, about 100 bucks, CRO oscilloscope which will usually be better than the specs and able to substract one channel from the other. OP is in the US and things there are much better than almost anywhere else when looking for a vintage oscilloscope. In the future, it will remain useful to work with PSUs, do analog work, etc.

Of couse any of the b*) options will have shortcomings: it's just a "toy" or is a "boat anchor" that a "newbie can't be sure about it really working good". And, going with a "b" option, it probably means OP will be getting an entry-level decent benchtop oscilloscope somewhere in the future.

But, if budget can't get stretched to about 400 bucks just for the oscilloscope, OP will have to accept some shortcoming -again unless he's sure he will never want to do any SPI work with ease.

TL;DR: get a 400 bucks, 4 channel new Rigol/siglent 12-bit device

[tggzzz]

Modern day oscilloscopes have become super versatile and for somebody at the beginning of their career, it makes sense to start with today's technology as much as financially possible.

But cheap entry-level scopes often have crippling limitations that a beginner might not appreciate before purchase.

Most have very deep capture buffers, so they can capture far more than can be shown on a <800x600 display.
Some have digital signal protocol decodes, so you can see the characters/digits being transmitted serially.
But the decodes only work with what is displayed on the screen, i.e. a few characters at best.
That means searching for the unexpected/incorrect message is very very very tedious and error prone.

Better to use a separate tool dedicated to that, e.g. a cheap protocol analyser.

Same problem with their FFTs ignoring most of the captured data. Plus their inputs are 8-bits at best, and probably significantly less at "high" frequencies (make sure you understand the scope's ENOB spec and how it affects the spectum). Makes their FFTs little more than a toy.

[Aldo22]

But cheap entry-level scopes often have crippling limitations that a beginner might not appreciate before purchase.

Well, it's not surprising that cheap devices have their limitations.
But if I can get a device for $130 that can do some protocol decoding, (limited but usable) FFT, has a (limited) signal generator and that opens a door for me to get to know the possibilities of modern measuring devices, why should I tie a boat anchor to my leg?

Somehow I don't understand what you are trying to tell us. 
Aren't boat anchors even more limited?

[tggzzz]

But cheap entry-level scopes often have crippling limitations that a beginner might not appreciate before purchase.

Well, it's not surprising that cheap devices have their limitations.
But if I can get a device for $130 that can do some protocol decoding, (limited but usable) FFT, has a (limited) signal generator and that opens a door for me to get to know the possibilities of modern measuring devices, why should I tie a boat anchor to my leg?

Somehow I don't understand what you are trying to tell us. 
Aren't boat anchors even more limited?

Strawman argument: not all old scopes are boat anchors [1] Many are delightfully portable - even though I have a snapped biceps muscle.

Personally I dislike "multipurpose" tools that attempt to do everything and end up doing nothing well. Whenever I've gone down that route I've rapidly found the limitations of one bit and had to spend more money on something without the limitations. Then I find the limitations of another bit and - you can guess the rest[2]. Exception: where the UUT has been carefully designed to avoid stressing the swiss army knife; my projects are never like that

Instead...
I prefer to get a good example of each type of tool.
I dislike using a hammer to insert nails, and prefer to use a screwdriver.

That's why I encourage people to use a scope 250MHz (or better) to debug signal integrity problems, then switch to using digital tools for digital signals (e.g. logic/protocol/LAN/CAN/etc analyser, printf()).

[1] The nearest things I have to boat anchors are desktop/portable 21GHz spectrum analysers. Their new cost was similar to that of a small house; mine (in perfect working order) cost about the same as a lawyer charges for 2 hours work


[2] N.B. the money is irrelevant if something only costs 10 £/$/Eur; just move on and regard it as a learning experience

[Aldo22]

@tggzzz: I understand what you mean, but we're in the "under $300" thread here and we're not talking about the same thing.
I'm talking about a first somewhat "complete" scope that opens a door to a new world.
In the old days, you might have bought a book on oscilloscopes. Today you buy a Hantek (or similar) for the same money and try out what you can do with it.
There is even something to read through the help system (Attachment). 

The price is so low, it's about the same as the surcharge of a Rigol DHO914S on a Rigol DHO914.
If you get tired of it, you can continue to use it as a signal generator. 
I can't see anything wrong with it.

[Fungus]

If you get tired of it

The thing is you KNOW you'll get tired of it and a Hantek has low resale value

OTOH a Rigol DHO804 might be all the oscilloscope you'll ever need (it's all the 'scope I need, personally) and even if it isn't you'll easily be able to sell it for a good price when you trade up to a pro-level 'scope.

I can't see anything wrong with it.

Hanteks are known for being limited in features, buggy, and crashing a lot.

[Aldo22]

The thing is you KNOW you'll get tired of it and a Hantek has low resale value

So what?
First and foremost, it has a low acquisition cost.
I'm not thinking of selling it. I'd rather give it away when I no longer need it.

Hanteks are known for being limited in features, buggy, and crashing a lot.

I'm not interested in what it's "known for".
I have one and I'm having fun with it and learning a lot.
I'm also aware of its limitations.

Maybe one day I'll buy a Rigol or Siglent, but I certainly won't regret the "investment" in the Hantek.
It's simply not expensive enough to regret it 

[tggzzz]

@tggzzz: I understand what you mean, but we're in the "under $300" thread here and we're not talking about the same thing.
I'm talking about a first somewhat "complete" scope that opens a door to a new world.

I'll sell you a very "complete" working recapped Tek 2465 4-channel 300MHz scope for £300. I have two, and ought to reclaim the space.

After making sure it works properly (possibly including recapping), I'll sell my spare 350MHz Tek 485 with real 50ohm input (not 50ohm//15pF) for the same.

You're not having my working dual-channel 1.7GHz scope that I bought for £20 But that definitely isn't a general purpose scope for a beginner

In the old days, you might have bought a book on oscilloscopes. Today you buy a Hantek (or similar) for the same money and try out what you can do with it.
There is even something to read through the help system (Attachment). 

The price is so low, it's about the same as the surcharge of a Rigol DHO914S on a Rigol DHO914.
If you get tired of it, you can continue to use it as a signal generator. 
I can't see anything wrong with it.

You do realise that 100MHz was just adequate for digital logic in the early 80s, don't you? Modern jellybean logic is much faster than that, and important features on the waveforms will simply be invisible.

You won't get tired of either the 485 or 2465; they are both delightfully easy to use. Unlike some new scopes, those Teks "do what they say on the tin".

The full manual for the Tek scopes are all free.

The 1ns risetime "signal generator" in the Tek 485 is useful for verifying performance, much more so than the traditional one in the 2465s.

[Aldo22]

I'll sell you a very "complete" working recapped Tek 2465 4-channel 300MHz scope for £300. I have two, and ought to reclaim the space.

After making sure it works properly (possibly including recapping), I'll sell my spare 350MHz Tek 485 with real 50ohm input (not 50ohm//15pF) for the same.

Thanks, but with shipping and taxes it will cost me an estimated CHF 500.-
I don't want to spend that at the moment.
I'm just playing and learning. 

[nctnico]

You do realise that 100MHz was just adequate for digital logic in the early 80s, don't you? Modern jellybean logic is much faster than that, and important features on the waveforms will simply be invisible.

You keep repeating this but in the real world you rarely run into situations where you need more than 100MHz. And certainly relatively simple circuits beginners are working on don't require use of >100MHz scopes. Features like single shot capture, deep memory and protocol decoding are far more useful when doing things with microcontrollers. And if the need arises, a typical university will have a high speed oscilloscope available. Or, when on a tight budget, one can buy one of the many older >500MHz DSOs from Agilent or Tektronix.

[tggzzz]

I'm just playing and learning. 

Including, I hope, the first two lines of my .sig 

[tggzzz]

You do realise that 100MHz was just adequate for digital logic in the early 80s, don't you? Modern jellybean logic is much faster than that, and important features on the waveforms will simply be invisible.

You keep repeating this but in the real world you rarely run into situations where you need more than 100MHz.

You keep failing to understand the only reason for needing a scope for digital logic is to ensure signal integrity. Once that is ensured, flip to digital domain tools.

Analogue tools such as scopes make very suboptimal digital domain tools.

And certainly relatively simple circuits beginners are working on don't require use of >100MHz scopes. Features like single shot capture, deep memory and protocol decoding are far more useful when doing things with microcontrollers. And if the need arises, a typical university will have a high speed oscilloscope available.

If they are working on modern digital logic, 100MHz is insufficient. <yawn>No, the signal period doesn't matter; only the transition time is important</yawn>

For the reasons I noted earlier, the deep memory and protocol decodes on low-end scopes can be very unsatisfactory to the point they become unhelpful. Much better to get the appropriate dedicated digital-domain tool.

[Aldo22]

I'm just playing and learning. 

Including, I hope, the first two lines of my .sig 

OK!
My Hantek can't measure frequency response (or bode plot), so I made a script that does.
I had to learn some Python to do it.
Is that what you mean? 

[nctnico]

You do realise that 100MHz was just adequate for digital logic in the early 80s, don't you? Modern jellybean logic is much faster than that, and important features on the waveforms will simply be invisible.

You keep repeating this but in the real world you rarely run into situations where you need more than 100MHz.

You keep failing to understand the only reason for needing a scope for digital logic is to ensure signal integrity. Once that is ensured, flip to digital domain tools.

I understand what I need to do my daily job just fine. And what you call digital domain tools have been integrated into DSOs a very long time ago. The first ones from HP where discontinued more than 20 years ago. If you think a DSO is not good at decoding, then I strongly suggest to get a modern day DSO from a decent brand and give that a spin. You'll be in for a pleasant surprise. There is no way I'm going to mess around with a clunky USB device.

[tggzzz]

You do realise that 100MHz was just adequate for digital logic in the early 80s, don't you? Modern jellybean logic is much faster than that, and important features on the waveforms will simply be invisible.

You keep repeating this but in the real world you rarely run into situations where you need more than 100MHz.

You keep failing to understand the only reason for needing a scope for digital logic is to ensure signal integrity. Once that is ensured, flip to digital domain tools.

I understand what I need to do my daily job just fine. And what you call digital domain tools have been integrated into DSOs a very long time ago. The first ones from HP where discontinued more than 20 years ago. If you think a DSO is not good at decoding, then I strongly suggest to get a modern day DSO from a decent brand and give that a spin. You'll be in for a pleasant surprise. There is no way I'm going to mess around with a clunky USB device.

Quite possibly. Are you still within the $300 limit?

I'm certainly not going to fork out £10k (to invent a figure) for something I can achieve for £500!

[mwb1100]

There are quite a few assumptions about what the OP want/needs in this thread.  I'll admit that I made the assumption that he wanted something very inexpensive that he could "learn the ropes" of an oscilloscope on.  Not something that would be intended to be the last scope bought.  That's often the approach I take with new tools - it gives the opportunity to figure out what I really need/want in a tool before spending the usually high price for a quality item.  Or if I need the high priced item at all.

But I could certainly be wrong about what the OP is looking for. Anyway, the OP has not responded to this thread since the first post; I think I'll wait for that before posting here further.

[theaustindixon]

There are quite a few assumptions about what the OP want/needs in this thread.  I'll admit that I made the assumption that he wanted something very inexpensive that he could "learn the ropes" of an oscilloscope on.  Not something that would be intended to be the last scope bought.  That's often the approach I take with new tools - it gives the opportunity to figure out what I really need/want in a tool before spending the usually high price for a quality item.  Or if I need the high priced item at all.

But I could certainly be wrong about what the OP is looking for. Anyway, the OP has not responded to this thread since the first post; I think I'll wait for that before posting here further.

Relatively inexpensive, good for learning on but also useful for most beginner-to-intermediate level projects, so I don't need to buy another one for a few years.

[baldurn]

@tggzzz: I understand what you mean, but we're in the "under $300" thread here and we're not talking about the same thing.
I'm talking about a first somewhat "complete" scope that opens a door to a new world.

I'll sell you a very "complete" working recapped Tek 2465 4-channel 300MHz scope for £300. I have two, and ought to reclaim the space.

That is 380 USD and I don't think that is good value for someones first scope. For approximately the same you can get the new Rigol or Siglent, which after hacking will be 200-250 MHz. The old CRO has slightly more bandwidth but that is also all it has going for it. The new scopes have warranty and a list of features too long to repeat here.

[nctnico]

so I don't need to buy another one for a few years.

You have to give up on that idea  Getting something cheap is a good idea to begin with and test the water but you'll either outgrow it or choose a different path. Either way you'll likely sell it in a few years.

[Fungus]

Some have digital signal protocol decodes, so you can see the characters/digits being transmitted serially.
But the decodes only work with what is displayed on the screen, i.e. a few characters at best.

Not true of the DHO800.

Better to use a separate tool dedicated to that, e.g. a cheap protocol analyser.

Do you know of one that does constant real time triggering/decoding/updating?

Last month I was coding a bit-bang I2C function; I think it would have been a real pain in the ass to constantly hit record on the LA, upload the program, wait a few seconds, press stop, then go mousing around looking for the data packet to see if it was OK or not.

My oscilloscope just sat there constantly decoding, all I had to do was upload the program and turn to look at the result on screen at each iteration.

[Fungus]

I'm thinking of selling my Micsig STO1104C if you're interested. Shipping from Spain.

[cv007]

Another inexpensive option is a low end picoscope. I have a 2205A in an edu version (translucent red case, Allied Electronics had their name on it), and it does pretty well for most simple needs (which applies in my case). There are downsides of course to a pc based scope with a limited bandwidth, but for the price you get new hardware and software that is the same for all their scopes. The newer version of their software is more modern, and is designed to be touchscreen friendly, but I would say you will need to use Windows (or maybe OSX) as that is their primary focus (they claim to be able to run on Linux, but every time I attempt that there is some problem). The ui is well done on version 7, and you can download and play around with it if you want to get a feel for it. I do like having a screen size (laptop/desktop) that doesn't require a magnifying glass, and using a mouse/keyboard puts you in familiar territory for dealing with the user interface.

I think the lower end picoscope makes for a nice entry into scopes, but as you start to climb to the higher models you start to match prices with the stand-alone scope and now price goes out of favor (but price does not always rule). If you do get a lower end model and later decide to upgrade to something else, you will know why you are upgrading, will know what you really need (and are now lacking), and the inexpensive pico will still be useful as a secondary scope.

They do have a number of videos and app notes available, but if they had some beginner 'course' that would take the user from A-Z I think they would sell lots of these things for edu (also make some translucent colored boxes like Allied did). Maybe there is some course ware for these that I'm not aware of.

Just a thought.

[Aldo22]

My oscilloscope just sat there constantly decoding, all I had to do was upload the program and turn to look at the result on screen at each iteration.

Can you show or link a screenshot or video that shows how this looks on the DHO800?

EDIT: OK, I found it in the video.

[J-R]

Rigol, Siglent, Keysight clearance/used:
https://www.rigolna.com/clearance/
https://siglentna.com/products/clearance/
https://saving.em.keysight.com/en/used

It's gone now, but the other day I was showing the Rigol site to a coworker and there was a DHO804 for $279.  Free US shipping.  Now there is a DHO802 for $209.  This seems like a completely valid purchase for a beginner on a tight budget.  You'll have decent community support and it can be liberated if desired.

Keysight recently started accepting online CC purchases and you get 5% off right now via that method.  This 100MHz 2 channel DSOX1102A scope is still their older design, but for under $350 could be an option: https://saving.em.keysight.com/en/used/oscilloscopes/dsox1102a-u08-2509926

A while back they had some EDU models for even less, but I haven't seen any more the past couple months.  Maybe if you set up an alert you could snag one.

(Not sure why, but the Keysight links aren't showing in some browsers...)

[tggzzz]

so I don't need to buy another one for a few years.

You have to give up on that idea  Getting something cheap is a good idea to begin with and test the water but you'll either outgrow it or choose a different path. Either way you'll likely sell it in a few years.

That is a good observation and advice.

Especially with instruments that are already fully depreciated (I sell almost everything for more than I paid: a pleasing bonus)

[tggzzz]

Some have digital signal protocol decodes, so you can see the characters/digits being transmitted serially.
But the decodes only work with what is displayed on the screen, i.e. a few characters at best.

Not true of the DHO800.

Better to use a separate tool dedicated to that, e.g. a cheap protocol analyser.

Do you know of one that does constant real time triggering/decoding/updating?

Last month I was coding a bit-bang I2C function; I think it would have been a real pain in the ass to constantly hit record on the LA, upload the program, wait a few seconds, press stop, then go mousing around looking for the data packet to see if it was OK or not.

My oscilloscope just sat there constantly decoding, all I had to do was upload the program and turn to look at the result on screen at each iteration.

Good question. I don't know since I don't have a cheap analyser.

My LA sits doing nothing until triggered (i.e. Zero dead time).
I've ordered a BusPirate5, but delivery has been delayed due to PUB cockups.

[tatel]

Relatively inexpensive, good for learning on but also useful for most beginner-to-intermediate level projects, so I don't need to buy another one for a few years.

So you want one of these new or still in the oven rigol/siglent 12-bit things. Just stretch your budget some 25% more to get it done right. I mean, if you are thinking about interfacing a microcontroller and a LCD screen, or something as basic as that, four channels are useful.

Even one of these will not be the same than a pro oscilloscope in the thousands range, but any less than that, and you will fail your target.

Buying an old, 8-bit, 4-channel old entry-level rigol/siglent devices isn't the way to go, at least while people continue to ask for about 300 bucks.

Of course, you could go the very wrong way, and buy first a toyscope Zeeweii 2512. Then one of those Hanteks that many (most?) buyers are abhorrent at. Then you finally could get a decent 400 bucks benchtop scope and realize you wasted half that money buying crap.

But in the meantime you could easily fool yourself into thinking you got for pennies something that performs better than some other thing that cost three or four times that money. You'll only need to believe the published cheap toyscope specs are like the Bible (and some stubbornness, too) to achieve that.

If budget is really tight, it would be wise to follow tggzzz's advice and to buy something that does fewer things but does it right. At least it will continue to be useful in the future and you won't think about throwing it in the trash bin.

[tggzzz]

Buying an old, 8-bit, 4-channel old entry-level rigol/siglent devices isn't the way to go, at least while people continue to ask for about 300 bucks.

Beginners are unlikely to understand the consequences of a 8bit resolution - and probably fewer Effective Number Of Bits (ENOB) - especially when using the device as a spectrum analyser.

Too few experienced engineers too, to the extent that it is a useful interview question.

If budget is really tight, it would be wise to follow tggzzz's advice and to buy something that does fewer things but does it right. At least it will continue to be useful in the future and you won't think about throwing it in the trash bin.

In life in general I tend to divide purchases into a number of distinct categories.

Transient interest/use: cheap, so throwing it away is acceptable.

Learning experience: use for a while until you have worked out what you really need. Either cheap+throwaway, or  cheapish and sell after use.

Everything else: spend money on buying something pleasing that will last a lifetime. It is horrifying how many things have lasted me a lifetime !

Neither of those categories is right/wrong. It helps to explicitly decide which you are spending money on.

[Aldo22]

I have a different view.
You can very well buy a Zeeweii as your first scope, then a Hantek and later a Rigol or Siglent or R&S and continue to use all the devices.

A Zeeweii DSO2512G has clear advantages over a benchtop scope (and of course also many disadvantages).
It is portable, light and robust. You can take it to the DUT and not vice versa. It's easy to use, and it starts up in 3 seconds etc.
In principle, this is a different category of device and you can still use both types.

Even a Hantek DSO2000 has a few advantages over a DHO800. It starts up in 12 seconds, has no fan and is therefore noiseless, it consumes less power and has a signal generator. This may not be important for everyone, but there is no reason not to continue using all these devices in certain situations, especially if they are not a financial burden.

[tggzzz]

I have a different view.
You can very well buy a Zeeweii as your first scope, then a Hantek and later a Rigol or Siglent or R&S and continue to use all the devices.

A Zeeweii DSO2512G has clear advantages over a benchtop scope (and of course also many disadvantages).
It is portable, light and robust. You can take it to the DUT and not vice versa. It's easy to use, and it starts up in 3 seconds etc.
In principle, this is a different category of device and you can still use both types.

Even a Hantek DSO2000 has a few advantages over a DHO800. It starts up in 12 seconds, has no fan and is therefore noiseless, it consumes less power and has a signal generator. This may not be important for everyone, but there is no reason not to continue using all these devices in certain situations, especially if they are not a financial burden.

Agreed.

Most of my scopes start up in 3-6 seconds. Those that don't are a pain - and tend to stay on the shelf except for the few occasions when I need their USP

I can't hear their fans, which makes me sad.

[tatel]

I have a different view.
You can very well buy a Zeeweii as your first scope, then a Hantek and later a Rigol or Siglent or R&S and continue to use all the devices.

A Zeeweii DSO2512G has clear advantages over a benchtop scope (and of course also many disadvantages).
It is portable, light and robust. You can take it to the DUT and not vice versa. It's easy to use, and it starts up in 3 seconds etc.
In principle, this is a different category of device and you can still use both types.

Even a Hantek DSO2000 has a few advantages over a DHO800. It starts up in 12 seconds, has no fan and is therefore noiseless, it consumes less power and has a signal generator. This may not be important for everyone, but there is no reason not to continue using all these devices in certain situations, especially if they are not a financial burden.

 

[nctnico]

I have a different view.
You can very well buy a Zeeweii as your first scope, then a Hantek and later a Rigol or Siglent or R&S and continue to use all the devices.

A Zeeweii DSO2512G has clear advantages over a benchtop scope (and of course also many disadvantages).
It is portable, light and robust. You can take it to the DUT and not vice versa. It's easy to use, and it starts up in 3 seconds etc.
In principle, this is a different category of device and you can still use both types.

IMHO the key should be that a piece of test equipment behaves consistently and what is implemented, works well. If the bandwidth is not as advertised, I don't see a really big problem (unless ofcourse the bandwidth is needed but for tinkering this typically isn't the case). Those Zeeweii scopes are cheap enough not to cause a major pain in your wallet. A couple of years ago I was stupid enough to spend 2500 euro on a Siglent scope which ended up in the trash. A useless POS and the (authorised!) Siglent distributor didn't want to take it back.

Since then I have a rule not to spend more than around 100 euro on really cheap equipment OR just pony up the money and buy the real deal.

Along tatel's statement from a few posts up; there aint no such thing as a free lunch so you won't be able to buy the same functionality cheaper from Chinese brands. In China engineers are just as expensive nowadays and A-brand equipment is being produced in China. So the only corner the Chinese brands can cut is spending less on software quality and testing if they want to pretend to offer the same functionality.

[Fungus]

A couple of years ago I was stupid enough to spend 2500 euro on a Siglent scope which ended up in the trash. A useless POS and the (authorised!) Siglent distributor didn't want to take it back.

 

[Aldo22]

IMHO the key should be that a piece of test equipment behaves consistently and what is implemented, works well. If the bandwidth is not as advertised, I don't see a really big problem (unless ofcourse the bandwidth is needed but for tinkering this typically isn't the case). Those Zeeweii scopes are cheap enough not to cause a major pain in your wallet.

Zeeweii is quite reputable for a cheap(-est) Chinese manufacturer.
The device does not crash and works as you would expect. The firmware seems quite mature.
Auto-range is very fast and it is overall pleasant to use.
The specs are certainly a little on the optimistic side, but what do you expect for $80 shipped including 2 probes etc?
I think it's better than Zoyi etc.

It can show a 10MHz square wave reasonably well (attachment). That's enough to have a quick look at "what's going on" and that's what it's there for.

A couple of years ago I was stupid enough to spend 2500 euro on a Siglent scope which ended up in the trash. A useless POS and the (authorised!) Siglent distributor didn't want to take it back.

Oops!   

[tautech]

A couple of years ago I was stupid enough to spend 2500 euro on a Siglent scope which ended up in the trash. A useless POS and the (authorised!) Siglent distributor didn't want to take it back.

Oops!   

Oops indeed, Nico's memory cells are in failure mode, it was 10 years ago ! !

I hope to be able to post a short review in a few days. Don't expect a video but some photo's and some screenshots.

[nctnico]

A couple of years ago I was stupid enough to spend 2500 euro on a Siglent scope which ended up in the trash. A useless POS and the (authorised!) Siglent distributor didn't want to take it back.

Oops!   

Oops indeed, Nico's memory cells are in failure mode, it was 10 years ago ! !

And Siglent still can't get decode to work reliably between firmware updates... Technical support doesn't even know the use case for protocol decoding and gives an utter BS answer. But also more recently Siglent gear I thought was good enough, failed miserably for basic functionality.

[tatel]

It wouldn't be useless to remember what the OP wants

Relatively inexpensive, good for learning on but also useful for most beginner-to-intermediate level projects, so I don't need to buy another one for a few years.

So, neither any Zeeweii (BTW, I love my DSO154Pro, that's what i get to go under my car to see what the lambda sensor is sending to the ECU) nor any of these Hanteks (whose buyers motto seems to usually be never again) will do. Therefore, to speak about what DSO2512G can/can't do, is off-topic and misleading.

There is people here that have much more knowledge than me, and OP would be wise following their advice. But there is also people that recklessly and stubbornly open their big mouth to give (I think) very bad advice. Not going to get into any arguments there; for reference, I think anybody will understand what I mean simply by looking at this post:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-2ch-pocket-dsosg-sigpeak-dso2512g/msg4887584/#msg4887584

[Aldo22]

@tatel: You brought the Zeeweii into this topic, not me. 

[2N3055]

A couple of years ago I was stupid enough to spend 2500 euro on a Siglent scope which ended up in the trash. A useless POS and the (authorised!) Siglent distributor didn't want to take it back.

Oops!   

Oops indeed, Nico's memory cells are in failure mode, it was 10 years ago ! !

And Siglent still can't get decode to work reliably between firmware updates... Technical support doesn't even know the use case for protocol decoding and gives an utter BS answer. But also more recently Siglent gear I thought was good enough, failed miserably for basic functionality.

How about Rigol releasing nonfunctional scope that violates Nyquist? How about Keysight last year making, putting into documentation,  and starting to sell option to decode USB2 on MSOX3000T just to realize that scope has FPGA that does not support it, only after customers started complaining why it does not work?

Or R&S releasing MXO4 that has actual zone trigger button but it is not implemented. And not yet, after few months. On 24k scope.
Did you mention that Keysight and AIM TTi AWG also did not not support your specific requirements.
Do you mention that also they should not buy Keysight scopes because you don't like them.
And that (expensive) Tektronix AWG you bought in the end also have bugs....

Just for the sake of completeness, you know.. Unbiased info..

P.S.  I have equipment from Rigol, Siglent, Keysight and AIM-TTi. They all work well for what they are... As for fixing bugs, worst is Rigol, but they also eventually get it to functional product. Just much slower than others, so just don't buy it first year after release....
And even Keysight has some minor bugs 8 years after release, one of which I found and was point blank said they won't fix it because they couldn't care less, because it is obscure and hard to replicate...

[nctnico]

Did you mention that Keysight and AIM TTi AWG also did not not support your specific requirements.
And that (expensive) Tektronix AWG you bought in the end also have bugs....

And the Siglent cheering crowd has entered the building  Maybe it is time to tell how much are they paying you (either in money or discounts)?

You are wrong in many ways. To name a few: I didn't test the Keysight AWG so I don't know, the AIM TTi AWG just didn't meet specifications so simply wasn't suitable and the Tektronix AWG doesn't have bugs that I know off. What Shahiar claimed was a bug ended up being operator error. And I never wrote I don't like Keysight scopes; it is just that their memory is rather short for doing embedded development so may not be ideal for that purpose. At least get your facts straight. Pointing out faults in other products is a rather dumb diversion tactic to hide the fact the manufacturer you like so much keeps dropping the ball in so many stupid ways it isn't even funny. Get your own house in order before making comments towards others.

[Martin72]

And the Siglent cheering crowd has entered the building

And who was it before that?
People who had a bad experience ages ago and have been living off it ever since...
Have you broadened your horizons in the meantime and borrowed an SDS5000X, an SDS2000Xplus, an SDS2000X HD or even a 6000 or 7000 for testing?
The earth has continued to turn since your experience, I know, sometimes you don't feel that way.
Get the devices from today to test so that you can have your say, otherwise it sounds like a long-playing record that always jumps back and forth in the same place.
Instead, you accuse others of being paid cheerleaders.
Think about what kind of style that is.
Sorry, but I think you are actually a competent, smart person.
Posts like this from you are completely irritating.

[nctnico]

And the Siglent cheering crowd has entered the building

And who was it before that?
People who had a bad experience ages ago and have been living off it ever since...

Not years ago and not one bad experience. If only it was 1 bad, isolated experience...  And I'm not the only one. Just read Siglent's response to a serious problem:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-1202x-e-serial-decoding-not-working/msg5180694/#msg5180694
They don't even know the real world use case! That is the most alarming part. But then the apologists get in and claim the equipment is too cheap to make it work as it should. Tell me I'm wrong to call that out?

I have had much better experiences with tech support from Tektronix and Keysight. I even went as far asking Keysight very specific questions about the long term reliability of one of their products. Their engineers went down to the component level in order to answer that question. And I'm not a big customer at all (far from it). Not saying Keysight never goes wrong, but they know their stuff and make it right.

[tautech]

And the Siglent cheering crowd has entered the building

And who was it before that?
People who had a bad experience ages ago and have been living off it ever since...
Have you broadened your horizons in the meantime and borrowed an SDS5000X, an SDS2000Xplus, an SDS2000X HD or even a 6000 or 7000 for testing?
The earth has continued to turn since your experience, I know, sometimes you don't feel that way.
Get the devices from today to test so that you can have your say, otherwise it sounds like a long-playing record that always jumps back and forth in the same place.
Instead, you accuse others of being paid cheerleaders.
Think about what kind of style that is.
Sorry, but I think you are actually a competent, smart person.
Posts like this from you are completely irritating.

This.

Hell, if you are prepared to test many and continually go up the ladder in search of higher BW anyone else can too.
They just need a will to do it.

However, the topic is best cheap scope, which is an entirely fluid situation as it is always changing.

[2N3055]

Did you mention that Keysight and AIM TTi AWG also did not not support your specific requirements.
And that (expensive) Tektronix AWG you bought in the end also have bugs....

And the Siglent cheering crowd has entered the building  Maybe it is time to tell how much are they paying you (either in money or discounts)?

Serves me right to try a fact based discussion with you.....
How much is R&S paying you to go into every Siglent topic to state R&S has superior decoding ...

Is this only level of discussion you are able to produce.??
Personal insults, insinuations and hate..?

[baldurn]

Not years ago and not one bad experience. If only it was 1 bad, isolated experience...  And I'm not the only one. Just read Siglent's response to a serious problem:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-1202x-e-serial-decoding-not-working/msg5180694/#msg5180694
They don't even know the real world use case! That is the most alarming part. But then the apologists get in and claim the equipment is too cheap to make it work as it should. Tell me I'm wrong to call that out?

I have had much better experiences with tech support from Tektronix and Keysight. I even went as far asking Keysight very specific questions about the long term reliability of one of their products. Their engineers went down to the component level in order to answer that question. And I'm not a big customer at all (far from it). Not saying Keysight never goes wrong, but they know their stuff and make it right.

Is it really fair to compare tech support for a product at least 10 times (or 100 times!) more expensive?

While the issue was handled badly by Siglent tech support, it does not really seem to be that big of a deal. It is a bad firmware for one specific submodel of a scope and the fix is to downgrade to the previous firmware and wait for an update. No other scopes are affected. Somehow you extended this into a general problem with Siglent, which it clearly is not.

[Aldo22]

The general excitement level indicates a full moon. 

[tatel]

At this point I think OP should have a clear picture about which advice is to be followed if he wants to waste his money. Enough said about that.

Other things to take into account:

a) It's worth to pay more to be sure the device you are buying does rigth what you want it to do.

b) It's worth to make additional searches before buying, to be sure the device you are considering does right what you want it to do. Don't take any advice in this thread as more than just a heading towards perhaps the right direction. Your homework is to know what you need, and to check carefully the device you are considering is able to do it right, before buying. Learning begins before buying, sorry. If you don't do your homework, you'll be spending your money willi-nilly. You could get bitten, and only you would be guilty for it. People speaking here does not necessarily own the devices you are considering.

c) It's worth to open new threads to ask questions if -after some searchs- you are still unsure the device you are considering does right what you want it to do. Asking questions specifically about some device will probably bring some owners to explain to you what they like/don't like on that device.

d) Even when asking about  an specific device, make sure to ask questions and get answers about the characteristics you are interested in. Owners of that device could be not using that characteristic and be unaware of any problems on it.

e) It's worth to buy from some seller that abides with consumer protection law and takes returns, just because you don't like what you got after all.

Last, even on the 400 bucks range, you'll probably won't get all you want. Say you hope to get a device with intregrated logic analyzer. There are devices in that range advertising that capability, but at work time, you could find they are not working as you were expecting.You could need to go up to a thousand bucks range to have a chance of getting that right. That's just an example. There will probably some compromise/choice to be made.

To avoid getting your ass bitten, the only way is to search and learn what you need, to do what you want. Quite a few hours of previous work. It will be easier if you do your homework, so you will be able to ask the right questions. Just a generic question as "best device on 300 bucks range" is not the best thing to do.

Take it easy, and good luck