Author Topic: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?  (Read 28906 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CHexclaim

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 69
  • Country: uy
is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« on: June 12, 2013, 02:11:54 pm »
In the price category of the Rigol Ds1052e (today's prices), is it still the best option or are there other options that will outperfom in someway it(features, quality, etc.) ?

 

Offline Psi

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7234
  • Country: nz
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2013, 02:25:12 pm »
The DS1052 is old now, there are better options with bigger screens.
I dont know of any models specifically though
Greek letter 'Psi' (not Pounds per Square Inch)
 

Offline valentinc

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Country: ro
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #2 on: June 12, 2013, 02:40:02 pm »
     The Siglent SDS1xxx series are clearly a better option for the same money... The hardware is 90% the same as the Rigol DS1052 anyway, but the bigger screen makes a huge difference in my opinion ... The ADCs are still overclocked... And the good thing is that the low-end unit starts at 70 Mhz analog bandwidth (compared to 50 Mhz on Rigol...) ...

     It depends on what you are looking for: in some respects an old analog Tektronix 2000 series is way better than this 400$ digital scopes...
Valentin
 

Offline Hydrawerk

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2380
  • Country: 00
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2013, 03:11:17 pm »
I don't like the Rigol Ds1052e front panel. It has multiplexed knobs and even no Single button. Siglent is better at this, but (!) some Siglents have quite short memory!
Amazing machines. https://www.youtube.com/user/denha (It is not me...)
 

JuanPC

  • Guest
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2013, 07:23:37 pm »
In the price category of the Rigol Ds1052e (today's prices), is it still the best option or are there other options that will outperfom in someway it(features, quality, etc.) ?
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/help-pick-a-scope-right-for-me/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/help-me-pick-the-right-scope-2/
 

Offline Emil

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 155
  • Country: no
    • ZeptoBit
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #5 on: June 12, 2013, 07:49:01 pm »
     The Siglent SDS1xxx series are clearly a better option for the same money... The hardware is 90% the same as the Rigol DS1052 anyway, but the bigger screen makes a huge difference in my opinion ... The ADCs are still overclocked... And the good thing is that the low-end unit starts at 70 Mhz analog bandwidth (compared to 50 Mhz on Rigol...) ...

I looked up the specs on the SDS1* series and all except the SDS1*CML have <=40K of memory. The CML scopes have 2M samples but are about $100 more than the Rigol DS1052.

Do these scopes have other advantages over the Rigol other than the larger screen that would make it worth buying despite the much smaller memory? (Or higher price in case of the CML)
 

Offline valentinc

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Country: ro
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #6 on: June 12, 2013, 08:42:35 pm »
   From what I can see on the Rigol website, the Rigol DS1052E has 16Kpts or 1 Mpts in Long Memory mode... And the Siglent SDS1072CML has 32Kpts or 2 Mpts in Long memory mode... And of course the 70 Mhz analog bandwidth compared to 50 Mhz (which of course isn't much, but it is a difference)

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/Rigol-DS1052E-50MHz-Band-widths-2-Channel-Digital-Oscilloscope/497625693.html
http://www.aliexpress.com/item/All-New-Siglent-70MHz-Digital-Storage-Oscilloscope-SDS1072CML-2-Channels-1-EXT-trigger-channel/612432450.html

   On AliExpress the prices are very similar... I don't see the $100 difference you speak of...

   Another difference, form what I can see is the equivalent sample rate of 50 GSa/s at the Siglent compared to the 10 GSa/s at the Rigol, but I think this doesn't make any differnce in practice...

   
Valentin
 

Offline Galaxyrise

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 526
  • Country: us
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #7 on: June 12, 2013, 08:48:10 pm »
And of course the 70 Mhz analog bandwidth compared to 50 Mhz (which of course isn't much, but it is a difference)
People here leave their 1052 at 50MHz?  I think you mean 100MHz :)
I am but an egg
 

Offline valentinc

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Country: ro
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #8 on: June 12, 2013, 08:50:53 pm »
     Is the new version of the Rigol hackable ? (a unit bought in 2013 I mean) I remeber (I could be wrong) that somewhere on this forum someone said that Rigol has made a change din the 1052E after they discovered that it was hackable... And it's not anymore...

     Please correct me if I'm wrong...
Valentin
 

Offline Emil

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 155
  • Country: no
    • ZeptoBit
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #9 on: June 12, 2013, 09:28:13 pm »
   On AliExpress the prices are very similar... I don't see the $100 difference you speak of...

I was thinking about the 100MHz SDS1072CML because I was assuming the Rigol would be hacked to 100MHz so it seemed more natural to compare to that model. But you are right, I got the price wrong even for that model, when comparing the lowest price I'v seen for each scope the difference is $69 and if comparing with the 70Mhz version there is almost no difference.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2013, 09:30:19 pm by Emil »
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3061
  • Country: fi
  • Starting with DLL21
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #10 on: June 13, 2013, 08:11:11 am »

Do these scopes have other advantages over the Rigol other than the larger screen that would make it worth buying despite the much smaller memory? (Or higher price in case of the CML)

Siglent have real dual timease in ALTernate mode.

Better user ergonomy. Example separate adjusting knobs for both channels.

Menu system least as good as in Rigol DS1000E.

Building quality least as good as in Rigol DS1000E  (yes I know Rigol becouse before I have also sell and tested these)
Good user adjustable DSP filters separately for both channels.
Real glass front of TFT surface.
Very silent FAN.
It is also good to know that last HW version start with numbers 11 (afaik and this time)

Rigol window zoom works still some amount better but this is FW related and I will  suppose this is going better in future FW upgrades. Just as also before they have repaired Equal Time mode. Also new FW's and service manuals available from Siglent.)

Also here some tests

Then, Siglent have also 6M recorder memory for scan mode and with very slow speeds it can also use USB memory directly! It make possible very long time continuous records. (also of course also usual "frame recorder" what is different)

In middle speeds 10ms/div to (Rig)200/(Sig)250ns/div Siglent have faster samplerate. next step is 100ns/div and there they have equal samplerate up to fastest horizontal speed.
Example with 500ns/div Siglent have 250MSa/s as Rigol have 100MSa/s as far as I know (data is old).
(it means that Rigol have Nyquist limit there 50MHz as Siglent have 125MHz)


« Last Edit: June 13, 2013, 08:26:25 am by rf-loop »
If practice and theory is not equal it tells that used application of theory  is wrong or the theory itself is wrong.
It is much easier to think an apple fall to the ground than to think that the earth and the apple will begin to move toward each other and collide.
 

JuanPC

  • Guest
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #11 on: June 13, 2013, 08:29:15 am »

Do these scopes have other advantages over the Rigol other than the larger screen that would make it worth buying despite the much smaller memory? (Or higher price in case of the CML)

Siglent have real dual timease in ALTernate mode.

Better user ergonomy. Example separate adjusting knobs for both channels.

Menu system least as good as in Rigol DS1000E.

Building quality least as good as in Rigol DS1000E  (yes I know Rigol becouse before I have also sell and tested these)
Good user adjustable DSP filters separately for both channels.
Real glass front of TFT surface.
Very silent FAN.
It is also good to know that last HW version start with numbers 11 (afaik and this time)

Rigol window zoom works still some amount better but this is FW related and I will  suppose this is going better in future FW upgrades. Just as also before they have repaired Equal Time mode. Also new FW's and service manuals available from Siglent.)

Also here some tests

Then, Siglent have also 6M recorder memory for scan mode and with very slow speeds it can also use USB memory directly! It make possible very long time continuous records. (also of course also usual "frame recorder" what is different)

In middle speeds 10ms/div to (Rig)200/(Sig)250ns/div Siglent have faster samplerate. next step is 100ns/div and there they have equal samplerate up to fastest horizontal speed.
Example with 500ns/div Siglent have 250MSa/s as Rigol have 100MHz.
(it means that Rigol have Nyquist limit there 50MHz as Siglent have 125MHz)

Interesting...
the SDS 1000CML Series are direct contender of the Instek GDS-1xxxA-U, or 2000A
http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349
http://www.siglent.com/en/product/detail.aspx?id=100000005058775&nodecode=119008001

SDS1152CML is in the $5OOusd. range.
SDS1102CML in the $4OOusd. range.
SDS1072CML in the $35Ousd. range.

sadly Siglent´s Top of the Line CFL is 300MHz 2GSa/s 24k
http://www.siglent.com/en/product/list.aspx?nodecode=119008001
« Last Edit: June 13, 2013, 08:46:25 am by JuanPC »
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3061
  • Country: fi
  • Starting with DLL21
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #12 on: June 13, 2013, 08:38:39 am »

sadly Siglent´s Top of the Line is 300MHz 2GSa/s 24k CFL
http://www.siglent.com/en/product/list.aspx?nodecode=119008001

This situation is changing soon (perhaps September-November)
(there is coming SDS2000 and perhaps later SDS3000)

Preliminary:
110k wfrms/s 14/28M memory, 2GSa/s etc.. (SDS2000)

« Last Edit: June 13, 2013, 09:15:34 am by rf-loop »
If practice and theory is not equal it tells that used application of theory  is wrong or the theory itself is wrong.
It is much easier to think an apple fall to the ground than to think that the earth and the apple will begin to move toward each other and collide.
 

Online tinhead

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1901
  • Country: 00
    • If you like my hacks, send me a donation
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #13 on: June 13, 2013, 09:45:03 am »

Then, Siglent have also 6M recorder memory for scan mode and with very slow speeds it can also use USB memory directly! It make possible very long time continuous records. (also of course also usual "frame recorder" what is different)


Good that you speak about recording. I just checked user manual and trying to understand it.
It seems that there are two kind of waveform recording:

on Utility Page 3 "Record"
on Utility Page 4 "Recorder"

"Record" can save up to 2500 waveframes (non continues frames, variable interval)

- question 1: what is the minimum interval, i don't se anything (except "set interval") in user manual (but i guess 1ms?)
- question 2: how long is the shortest interval in real? So when you set e.g. 1ms and 1000 frames, how long it takes in real
  to save these 1000 frames?
- question 3: is it working with long memory enabled or only with short memory?
- question 4: when you playback waveframe, how long is the captured data? is is the same length as when in RUN mode?
  (backgrond of the question: when the DSO can save internaly 6M, and in this mode 2500 frames then each of them
   would be 2400pts short, and not 40000pts)


"Recorder" can save up to 6M of data internally (continues stream, no gap)
- question 1: is there any indicator showing how much data i can save? In the manual i see only "playback" indicator,
  with remaining time, but no record indicator (what of course can be user manual problem)

And maybe a general question, in these models with no long memory, (if you have such and know it for sure) which of
these two recorders are available?
I don't want to be human! I want to see gamma rays, I want to hear X-rays, and I want to smell dark matter ...
I want to reach out with something other than these prehensile paws and feel the solar wind of a supernova flowing over me.
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3061
  • Country: fi
  • Starting with DLL21
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #14 on: June 13, 2013, 10:13:46 am »

Then, Siglent have also 6M recorder memory for scan mode and with very slow speeds it can also use USB memory directly! It make possible very long time continuous records. (also of course also usual "frame recorder" what is different)


Good that you speak about recording. I just checked user manual and trying to understand it.
It seems that there are two kind of waveform recording:

on Utility Page 3 "Record"
on Utility Page 4 "Recorder"

"Record" can save up to 2500 waveframes (non continues frames, variable interval)

- question 1: what is the minimum interval, i don't se anything (except "set interval") in user manual (but i guess 1ms?)
- question 2: how long is the shortest interval in real? So when you set e.g. 1ms and 1000 frames, how long it takes in real
  to save these 1000 frames?
- question 3: is it working with long memory enabled or only with short memory?
- question 4: when you playback waveframe, how long is the captured data? is is the same length as when in RUN mode?
  (backgrond of the question: when the DSO can save internaly 6M, and in this mode 2500 frames then each of them
   would be 2400pts short, and not 40000pts)


"Recorder" can save up to 6M of data internally (continues stream, no gap)
- question 1: is there any indicator showing how much data i can save? In the manual i see only "playback" indicator,
  with remaining time, but no record indicator (what of course can be user manual problem)

And maybe a general question, in these models with no long memory, (if you have such and know it for sure) which of
these two recorders are available?

Some questions I will answer later. (I do not want write only from my bad memory)


 
Quote
(backgrond of the question: when the DSO can save internaly 6M, and in this mode 2500 frames then each of them
   would be 2400pts short, and not 40000pts)

Afaik this 6M recorder is not same memory as frame recorder memory.
(If I remember right also model what do not have 6M slow recorder still have normal frame record function.)

6M memory is also only used for slow speeds. (scan mode)
If sampling speed is 1kSa/s record lenght is 6000 seconds.
With 50s/dif there is 50sample/s. Record lenght is over 34 hour.
If use USB memory and redirect recorder to USB it can record more.
(this can use only with very slow speeds, 1kSa/s (barely) and works better with 500Sa/s or slover)

With most short memory models  there is 6M slow speed recorder available (not exactly remember what model do not have this) and all have normal frame recorder.

later after I have time I will check more this frame record.
If practice and theory is not equal it tells that used application of theory  is wrong or the theory itself is wrong.
It is much easier to think an apple fall to the ground than to think that the earth and the apple will begin to move toward each other and collide.
 

Offline Hydrawerk

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2380
  • Country: 00
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #15 on: June 13, 2013, 04:14:52 pm »
Well, this is only a painted image. https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-rigol-ds1052e-still-the-best-option-in-its-class/?action=dlattach;attach=51202;image
Note the speling mistakes: TRIGER, RUN CONTRAL
The scope is clearly inspired by Agilent DSOX2000, but it looks overall weird. The softkeys do not match the screen pictures...
« Last Edit: June 13, 2013, 04:18:32 pm by Hydrawerk »
Amazing machines. https://www.youtube.com/user/denha (It is not me...)
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3061
  • Country: fi
  • Starting with DLL21
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #16 on: June 14, 2013, 07:07:12 am »
The softkeys do not match the screen pictures...

just for fun
= do not take serious

Twenty years ago one western well known big brand make this "rolls-royce" (and there is lot of same kind of examples and not only one highly admired big brands) and also price was good car price.  With this price, still soft key displacement.  Can you accept this crap becouse it is not made in China.

Also in these years I have not seen any your comment about weird look or totally bullshit crap UI but still real engineers in labs have no troubles to use these equipments. Perhaps they just have been well educated and they know how to use and make tests instead of watching cosmetics and making false kids playing class measurements.
I have never seen any prfessional people comment about example this machine cosmetics.
(this is drawing but in nature it is same or even worse)
 
But, displacement amount is some  less but what really weird look, every button bottom on display have different displacement. Very odd?


« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 07:13:26 am by rf-loop »
If practice and theory is not equal it tells that used application of theory  is wrong or the theory itself is wrong.
It is much easier to think an apple fall to the ground than to think that the earth and the apple will begin to move toward each other and collide.
 

Offline sorin

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 246
  • Country: al
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #17 on: June 14, 2013, 10:08:53 am »



This situation is changing soon (perhaps September-November)
(there is coming SDS2000 and perhaps later SDS3000)

Preliminary:
110k wfrms/s 14/28M memory, 2GSa/s etc.. (SDS2000)



What will be the price for this unit?
Same as Rigol 2000 series?
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 10:16:06 am by sorin »
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3061
  • Country: fi
  • Starting with DLL21
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #18 on: June 14, 2013, 10:12:10 am »

Then, Siglent have also 6M recorder memory for scan mode and with very slow speeds it can also use USB memory directly! It make possible very long time continuous records. (also of course also usual "frame recorder" what is different)


Good that you speak about recording. I just checked user manual and trying to understand it.
It seems that there are two kind of waveform recording:

on Utility Page 3 "Record"
on Utility Page 4 "Recorder"

"Record" can save up to 2500 waveframes (non continues frames, variable interval)

- question 1: what is the minimum interval, i don't se anything (except "set interval") in user manual (but i guess 1ms?)
- question 2: how long is the shortest interval in real? So when you set e.g. 1ms and 1000 frames, how long it takes in real
  to save these 1000 frames?
- question 3: is it working with long memory enabled or only with short memory?
- question 4: when you playback waveframe, how long is the captured data? is is the same length as when in RUN mode?
  (backgrond of the question: when the DSO can save internaly 6M, and in this mode 2500 frames then each of them
   would be 2400pts short, and not 40000pts)


"Recorder" can save up to 6M of data internally (continues stream, no gap)
- question 1: is there any indicator showing how much data i can save? In the manual i see only "playback" indicator,
  with remaining time, but no record indicator (what of course can be user manual problem)

And maybe a general question, in these models with no long memory, (if you have such and know it for sure) which of
these two recorders are available?


Partial answer. Have not enough time to do more deep tests with this scope at this time.

It store frames. 1 frame is one display! (or if it is more, it can not look, can not horizontally shift in playback.  Stored frames can not zoom vertical or horizontal
Stored frames can play back using settable interval and also by frame numbers or single frames.
They are more like sequantially stored TFT images. (I did not look if possible save single frames as waveform data to USB but I believe can not. Only image.)

setting for record, minimum 1ms (but it can not this speed in real life)

Test:
long or short memory. No affect. it store only  TFT area"frames" and only one selected channel.
50us/div. (tested only with this due to lack of time for tests)

2500 frames continuously. Around 110 second. (long mem selected and around same resull with short memory selected) It give 44ms period for frames.

No measurements available for playback frames. Normal cursors available but no tracking cursors in frame playback.

Blind time between frames is big as usual in low price scopes.
If practice and theory is not equal it tells that used application of theory  is wrong or the theory itself is wrong.
It is much easier to think an apple fall to the ground than to think that the earth and the apple will begin to move toward each other and collide.
 

Offline CodyShaw

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 44
  • Country: ca
    • My Blog!
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #19 on: June 14, 2013, 02:42:28 pm »
I believe Rigol lowered the 100 MHz models price to be on par (50$ more?) than the 50 MHz model, so its a bit of a moot point nowadays.

     Is the new version of the Rigol hackable ? (a unit bought in 2013 I mean) I remeber (I could be wrong) that somewhere on this forum someone said that Rigol has made a change din the 1052E after they discovered that it was hackable... And it's not anymore...

     Please correct me if I'm wrong...
Candidate for Bachelor of Applied Science, Electrical Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Sept. 2011 – Present
3A Electrical Engineering
 

Offline valentinc

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 116
  • Country: ro
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #20 on: June 14, 2013, 05:42:13 pm »
   On the Rigol webiste the price diffrence between 50 and 100 Mhz verions is $399-$329=$70... From what I remember the Siglent price difference is more than that... But I can't find any reference prices... Because on ebay or aliexpress the price + shipping varies much... and of course depends on what country you are buying from...
Valentin
 

Offline saturation

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4788
  • Country: us
  • Doveryai, no proveryai
    • NIST
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #21 on: June 14, 2013, 07:58:03 pm »
One thing important to consider in buying low end scopes is the country you get it from that provides local support.   

All these scopes have pros and cons; local purchase and support can be the tie breaker as it will save you a lot of grief if you need to return it or ask for repair or you find bugs you cannot live with, as marmad found out when he was testing low end scopes. 

If you get fixated on one brand and buy mail order, should things go wrong, its very difficult to ship for service back to China or wherever. 

There are also some local expert in different parts of the world closer to you were someone may help you if you buy a brand they support or know more off, such as many who post on this forum.

If several brands are available, then you can test and evaluate them yourself before committing to ownership and return what you do not like. 


Best Wishes,

 Saturation
 

Online tinhead

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1901
  • Country: 00
    • If you like my hacks, send me a donation
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #22 on: June 14, 2013, 10:06:20 pm »
...

thanks for the answer, I performed the same test on Tekway/Hantek "Recorder" so let's compare to Siglent Record/Recorder

Max of frames
Tekway/Hantek - 1000
Siglent - 2500

Minimum interval
Tekway/Hantek - 1ms (but it takes 11ms for 1ms frame)
Siglent - 1ms (but it takes 44ms for one 1ms frame)

i can't speak for Siglent, but on Tekway/Hantek when i set 90ms then the real interval is 100ms,
so in principle always +10ms independant on interval setting.

What memory length can be enabled for Record feature
Tekway/Hantek - 4000pts (with max 1000 frames), 40000pts (with max 500 frames)
Siglent - automatic only screen size (~500pts)

Zoom on playback frames
Tekway/Hantek - yes (vertical and horizontal)
Siglent - no

Measurment on playback frames
Tekway/Hantek - no
Siglent - no

Cursor measurment on playback frames
Tekway/Hantek - direct no, indirect via REF or SAVE/RELOAD waveform - yes
Siglent - yes

Extras
Tekway/Hantek
 - frames can be saved/reloaded an single/selected/all frames,
 - each frame can be set as REF,
 - each frame can be exported as CSV (such CSV can be later imported as regular waveform, so all
   DSO operations like on normally exported/imported waveform available)
 - screenshot of each waveframe
 - not only zoom but as well vert/horz. position of playback frames can be changed
 - FFT (when 4k memory selected) possible on each playback waveframe (manual scroll with F3/V0
   knob only through frames, no autoplayback).
 - playback data can not be streamed to PC
 - no separate "no-gap" recorder (except direkt access via SDK to Screen buffer or FPGA FIFOs)

Siglent (some maybe missing, see below)
 - only screen snapshot
 - for long timebase "Recorder" can be used for no-gap recording/streaming to PC
- I have not tested some things what you list as Extras
« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 11:40:32 am by tinhead »
I don't want to be human! I want to see gamma rays, I want to hear X-rays, and I want to smell dark matter ...
I want to reach out with something other than these prehensile paws and feel the solar wind of a supernova flowing over me.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 29476
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #23 on: June 15, 2013, 12:49:26 am »
   On the Rigol webiste the price diffrence between 50 and 100 Mhz verions is $399-$329=$70... From what I remember the Siglent price difference is more than that... But I can't find any reference prices... Because on ebay or aliexpress the price + shipping varies much... and of course depends on what country you are buying from...

Here in oz it's $80 to go from 70MHz to 100MHz for Siglent CML:
http://www.triosmartcal.com.au/234-siglent
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3061
  • Country: fi
  • Starting with DLL21
Re: is Rigol Ds1052e still the best option in its class?
« Reply #24 on: June 15, 2013, 09:58:25 am »
tinhead

I have not tested some things what you list as Extras
--------

If look just 100MHz or 50MHz namelpates and 70MHz and 100MHz, and then max memory and up to samplerates it do not tell whole truth. Both have advantages and disadvantages but in main stream Siglent 70MHz is more like Rigol 100MHz exept it still beats it example in samplerates.
Ok, there is 2ns/div in Rigol 100MHz. But this difference is marginal becouse maximum samplerate is 1Gsa or 500Msa/s. (same comment for Siglent 100MHz model where is 2.5ns/div)

Siglent 70MHz -3dB point is around 115MHz. (measured using 50ohm external trerminator)
And around just over 130MHz measured using Siglent own 70MHz probes what come with scope)


With Siglent SDS1072CML own probe from 50 ohm source (source flatness is good HP8644B with options)


SDS1072CML With 50 ohm external terminator


For compare to Siglent 100MHz model (1102CML)

SDS1102CML  With 50 ohm external terminator



Too many times it is looked only alone max samplerates.
Example using 10us/div in Rigol all frequency components over 12.5MHz what reach ADC produce total garbage. In Siglent this (Nyquist) frequency with same settings is 50MHz.
With this setting, 10us/div example,  it can say oscilloscope  is maximum 12.5MHz (Rigol) or 50MHz (Siglent). This need always remember with digilat oscilloscopes. It is good to look also slower horizontal speeds samplerate for estimate real BW.

Here compared Rigol and Siglent specially for middle speeds. In scan mode Rigol samplerates are better compared to Siglent. Siglent Long memory is not available in scan mode for rise samplerates.

Here only setting steps 1 and 5 becouse intermediate step is different (Rigol 2 / Siglent 2.5)

« Last Edit: June 15, 2013, 10:07:56 am by rf-loop »
If practice and theory is not equal it tells that used application of theory  is wrong or the theory itself is wrong.
It is much easier to think an apple fall to the ground than to think that the earth and the apple will begin to move toward each other and collide.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf