Siglent Releases SDS1204X-E To US Market

[rf-loop]

200MHz BW is quite borderline for 500Msa/s. It is just barely enough if we have 200MHz sinewave or if it is something else it must not have any meaningful amount over 250MHz components. 200MHz nominal BW means that front end with gaussian type shape do not attenuate well frequencies over fNyquist what may lead many kind of errors in measurements.
I will recommend 100MHz model until there is  reason for 200MHz and user also know some limits with 200MHz in some situations.

Where this reasoning breaks is where harmonics are always a multiple of the fundamental frequency. So a 200MHz signal's first harmonic will be at 300MHz which is well beyond the input filter cutt-off frequency and as an extra bonus the probes together with what is driving the signal will attenuate the harmonics even further. Harmonic distortion is way overblown. Besides that the analog front-end / ADC chips used in this scope (and many others!) are extremely low noise so having 100MHz versus 200MHz makes no difference in noise levels.

Nice example how you selective pick-up and then comment without original context. 

With 100MHz BW this scope have 500Msa/s for all channels simultaneously. fNyquist/BWcorner = 2.5
Also for 3.5ns risetime it have around 1.75 samples.
Oscilloscope is made for characterize unknown signal what may have what ever frequency components.
We can be quite sure that with 100MHz BWcorner frequency it attenuate well all frequency components what go over fNyquist what is 250MHz. And as we know Sinc interpolation in practice (as thumb rule) need that we stay under around fNyquist/x  where x is something between 1.1 and 1.3 depending used Sinc interpolation performance. (1.25 is good thumb rule)
Also 200MHz BW is more noisy than 100MHz. If typically need 100MHz max why want more noise just for "it is nice to have more BW".
200MHz BW is quite borderline for 500Msa/s. It is just barely enough if we have 200MHz sinewave or if it is something else it must not have any meaningful amount over 250MHz components. 200MHz nominal BW means that front end with gaussian type shape do not attenuate well frequencies over fNyquist what may lead many kind of errors in measurements.
I will recommend 100MHz model until there is  reason for 200MHz and user also know some limits with 200MHz in some situations.

NNC

[nctnico]

Yes, but even an unknown signal will have to comply with the laws of physics and thus have harmonics which are a multiple of the fundamental frequency. So in reality there are only very few signals which actually produce visual aliasing artefacts because those signals will need to be in a sweetspot where their harmonics are right in the (small) frequency band where signal reconstruction doesn't work very well. But even then the displayed signal will be within the oscilloscope's specifications because the harmonics are beyond the bandwidth anyway so there is no problem.

[Mr. Scram]

Could the zealots please stop it with the "hur this scope can do so much more than the DS054Z it's amazeballs you can't even compare them" versus "it's no contest the DS1054 does pretty much the same and costs a lot less and the Siglent is sooo expensive".

We know. We fucking know. You've told us. A hundred times.

[Fungus]

Could the zealots please stop it with the "hur this scope can do so much more than the DS054Z it's amazeballs you can't even compare them" versus "it's no contest the DS1054 does pretty much the same and costs a lot less and the Siglent is sooo expensive".

We know. We fucking know. You've told us. A hundred times.

They started it. 

[jgalak]

What I want to know is whether the SDS1104X is hackable to 200MHz....

[kelchm]

Ended up picking up the SDS1104X-E as my first oscilloscope. I went back and forth between this and the Rigol 1054Z, but I think I made the right decision.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk