Products > Test Equipment
DSOX1204G 200Mhz vs Used MSO3014A (Calibrated in 2018)
kcbrown:
--- Quote from: erwets on October 27, 2021, 05:01:54 am ---As for the other scopes, the fan scope these days seems to be the Siglent SDS2104X Plus. Unfortunately, I had the chance to use the 2104X and it honestly just felt subpar. I definitely don't want to start a flamewar, and I can't really point to any specific spec to say that the Keysight is better. By all accounts, it's actually worse on paper....but if just feels so right :scared: I have also used a number of scopes for work, and I just like Keysight (granted a much higher tier of Keysight at work). Great UX, intuitive controls, polished product. It's hard to beat. Sucks that it command such a premium, but :-//
--- End quote ---
From what I've seen (and I've not used one of the Keysight scopes myself, so I can't say for sure), the Keysight kills everything on responsiveness of the controls. Nothing else beats it, though some (such as the Instek GDS-1000B and GDS-2000E series) come close when the scope isn't under high load.
The Siglent 2000X+ scope is an incredible scope for its price range. But good as it is, there's no way it can match a Keysight 3000 series scope except perhaps for noise floor. This shouldn't be a surprise, seeing how the Keysight is nearly 4 times the price without serial decoding, and 5 times the price with it.
If you can afford it and it meets your needs for bandwidth, noise floor, etc., then the Keysight 3000 looks like it should be an excellent way to go. Its new price is nearly twice what you're being asked to pay, and nothing else compares in responsiveness. But make sure that it is fully functional before committing the funds. I'm surprised that the seller is selling this one for this kind of price, and it makes me wonder if perhaps something is broken.
erwets:
Thanks for the insights!
--- Quote from: kcbrown on October 27, 2021, 10:47:46 pm ---But make sure that it is fully functional before committing the funds. I'm surprised that the seller is selling this one for this kind of price, and it makes me wonder if perhaps something is broken.
--- End quote ---
Yes, I'm hesitant for this very reason, otherwise I would have probably purchased it already. I do not know the party selling the scope, and I'm suspicious by nature :). I'm writing down all the things I would want to test before finalizing the deal, but it's hard to really check everything off the list. It would be pretty upsetting if I found out something was pretty off within the first 2 months of usage.
Someone:
--- Quote from: erwets on October 27, 2021, 11:08:17 pm ---I'm writing down all the things I would want to test before finalizing the deal, but it's hard to really check everything off the list. It would be pretty upsetting if I found out something was pretty off within the first 2 months of usage.
--- End quote ---
Self-test "80% confidence level that the oscilloscope is operating properly". Or bring the cables to run a self-calibration, that will shake out any problems with the analog paths.
kcbrown:
--- Quote from: erwets on October 27, 2021, 11:08:17 pm ---Yes, I'm hesitant for this very reason, otherwise I would have probably purchased it already. I do not know the party selling the scope, and I'm suspicious by nature :). I'm writing down all the things I would want to test before finalizing the deal, but it's hard to really check everything off the list. It would be pretty upsetting if I found out something was pretty off within the first 2 months of usage.
--- End quote ---
Well, fortunately, you can tell pretty much everything about the basic functionality of the scope with the probe calibration signal. Just using that will allow you to test the signal inputs, the triggering system, the acquisition system, the CPU, the display, etc., perhaps even up to and including the bandwidth of the channel. It's a 4 channel scope, and it's highly unlikely that the bandwidth of all channels would somehow be compromised, so if the signal looks the same (particularly at the corners of the square wave) across all channels then they're likely to be good to go in terms of the bandwidth. This presumes that the square wave itself has at least one transition that's fast enough to exceed the input bandwidth.
I have to second the notion of using the scope's self-calibration as a test, too.
If all of that works, then the only question left would be the digital inputs, the external trigger input, and the signal generator.
If this scope isn't being supplied with the digital MSO probes then you'll have no good way of testing the digital inputs, so the most you'll likely be able to do is a visual inspection of the pins of the socket.
For the external trigger input, you'd need a signal generator or something to test that.
And obviously, you can't test the signal generator unless it's enabled (but if it is, then you can test that directly and then use it to test the external trigger input).
Oh, and you'll want to test all the knobs and buttons on the front panel to make sure they work, and perhaps the USB connectors as well.
Anyway, testing the scope should be relatively straightforward, all in all.
bdunham7:
--- Quote from: erwets on October 27, 2021, 04:24:37 am ---I appreciate any advice. Thanks!
--- End quote ---
Well first, perhaps I missed it but I see no mention of what you plan on doing with the scope. So what is your use case--what for, how often, etc?
Secondly, are you going to be OK with a lot less memory than more modern scope have? And yes, whether NOS or current new, those are both 'older' models.
Third, the decade-plus old scope is not going to have any warranty and given Keysight's tendencies lately, I'm pretty sure you're going to be paying your money and taking your chances. If you were getting something truly remarkable, perhaps that would be OK, but are you? I don't know--what makes that particular scope so attractive to you other than that it seems very nice and was expensive new?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version