Products > Test Equipment
REVIEW - Rigol DS2072 - First Impressions of the DS2000 series from Rigol
marmad:
Video comparison of the Rigol DS2000 and the new Siglent SDS2000 series here:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/review-siglent-sds2304-a-comparison-of-features-with-rigol-ds2000-series/
Teneyes:
--- Quote from: marmad on August 21, 2014, 10:21:45 am ---Video comparison of the Rigol DS2000 and the new Siglent SDS2000 series here:
--- End quote ---
It would be interested to see if the fuzzy traces with 2 channel at fast scan rates shows on the Siglent like the latest DS2000 FW. With and without SinX/X?.
On the Rigol it seems to me to be related to SinX/X and intensity levels. That have changed on latest Rigol firmware releases.
marmad:
--- Quote from: Teneyes on August 21, 2014, 07:32:10 pm ---It would be interested to see if the fuzzy traces with 2 channel at fast scan rates shows on the Siglent like the latest DS2000 FW. With and without SinX/X?.
On the Rigol it seems to me to be related to SinX/X and intensity levels. That have changed on latest Rigol firmware releases.
--- End quote ---
No problem, Teneyes. I have the Siglent for a couple of more days, so I can post some images. Can you please tell me exactly what you want to see; e.g. test signal, timebase, etc.?
Teneyes:
A while back , WIM13 noted that the traces are a bit more fuzzy when 2 channels were on after the last few FW updates. This is with FW 00.03.00.01.03
1 , 2 Bellow I show Chan 1 Only in Vectors and Dots with 70 MHz sinewave input
3 , 4 I then show both Channels 1 & 2 on, in dots and Vectors
5 Then I show a close up of the input and the noise appears to be some sort of sine wave on the traces
6 50msec Persistence
Could this be SinX/X extrapolation??
It would nice to be able to turn off SinX/X .
or is a change in the Intensity levels with no change in the min. persistence calculation?
Teneyes:
Fuzzy Traces
here I show fuzzy traces at Persistence settings of Min, 50ms, 100ms , 200ms. 500ms
It looks like Min. Presistence is set to an incorrect value!!!
and is about 200ms
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version