| Products > Test Equipment |
| Finally! Hantek HDM3065 6.5 Digit DMM |
| << < (6/24) > >> |
| maxwell3e10:
While I am happy to use B-brand oscilloscopes, generators and power supplies, I honestly can't understand the appeal of questionable-quality precision DMMs. Unlike other equipment, a DMM is supposed to be a black box that magically gives the right answer no matter what input you throw at it and it is often difficult to verify its operation. Even A brands often have subtle problems. There is a robust supply of used 5-6-7 digit DMMs that cost a fraction of even the cheapest new ones. And they are already well-aged, as opposed to fast-aged. |
| Marco Camara:
Unfortunately, I could not find even ONE example of these "used 5-6-7 digit DMMs that costs a fraction of even the cheapest new ones" here in Brazil. Yes, I have found some examples of good, but VERY old equipments (HP 34401A, Keithley 2000 etc), but none of them was cheap (they cost even more than what I have paid for my equipment). Besides that, I will have no warranty and they don't offer new features like Trend chart, Histogram etc. I have just received my equipment - it arrived yesterday. Well, I have made some tests, and as I can see by now, it's working very well, with precise and accuracy measures (I have compared them with a Agilent 3458A - 8 1/2 digits measures). All of that with a new and beautiful interface, and 3 years of warranty. I understand and respect your opinion, but I don't think I have made a bad acquisition. A think one of these "peaces of crap" would be a good option if you don't have enough money to buy a Keysight, or Keithley fantastic new equipments. |
| rsjsouza:
Indeed. Many countries around the world, including Brasil, have a very limited and overpriced used market - customs does not help with that, raising a "cheap" foreign import to a level that dillutes its advantages. People tend to forget that US is a planet on its own with regards to test gear. I am glad you are verifying it against a 3458 powerhouse - who knows? Depending on how the meter goes, you might be their best advertising. :-+ |
| Marco Camara:
I have made many tests, and the hardware seems to be good. I'm testing resistors e voltage references which were measured with 3458, and the results are similar. I would must be very satisfied, but ... I'm having problems in my tests with software to connect HDM3065 to my computer/network. Ok, when I have decided to buy the HDM3065, I was expecting this kind of problems. Chineses companies aren't typically good with software, I know. Well, I'm still trying to use their software, and I have asked for help from Hantek. I will continue trying a few days more. In parallel, I'm looking for open software solutions, like this one: (which I have found here in this forum, and looks very nice) https://lygte-info.dk/project/TestControllerIntro%20UK.html I'll let you know of my progress ... or deception ;) |
| toli:
The nice GUI on newer units is appealing, the histogram and plots too. But this is something that can mostly be taken out of the equation. There are free sw available for working with all these older A-brand DMM's, including some excellent sw shared by members of this forum to communicate with lots of older instruments. I use these with my meters and this gives all the "advanced functionality" I need. A DMM is supposed to be a tool you can trust, not only when its new, but many years forward. Even cheap Aneng meters are spot on for a fraction of the price when new, but I wouldn't trust them for anything to do with accuracy. Same with my Uni-T units. I've purchased older 34401A and K2000, both are many years old (the 34401A is an HP branded unit, that's how old it is). Both are still showing results in good agreement with each other as well as newer meters (34461A) I've compared against when I've had access to them. For what its worth, I've payed ~300$ for each for these locally (not in the US). The original owner of the HP was a big company that kept all tools calibrated, which increased my level of trust in its readings. I wouldn't say getting a Hantek unit is a bad decision, especially if there are no options for a trusted brand with many years of proven record. However, I would be much more suspicious of it than I would of a new meter from a trusted brand, and more suspicious than I would with an older well aged trusted meter that was calibrated for the first few years of operation at least. If you have the occasional access to other meters you trust for a direct comparison this can help build the trust over time, which is very useful. If you (Marco) will have the ability to compare it as time goes by, I think this can be of significant value to other forum members who are considering this meter. I actually do a "sanity check" for my meters from time to time (maybe once a year or so). Have a look at the attached picture below as an example. This was a measurement I took of a few weeks ago during my ~yearly "sanity check" of comparing most of my DMM's (and in this case the electronic load too), just to see if anything is out of expected bounds, or drifted significantly compared to the other meters. They are all in good agreement, despite non of them being new. Actually the one farthest out from the mean of the batch is also the newest meter here, the UT61E. Its 9 years old IIRC, and it was spot on when it was new. Now, it has drifted somewhat (actually it drifted mostly in the first 1-2 years and then more or less settled). |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |