o scope for someone starting out 200-400$

[mastershake]

what is the most up to date recommended unit in the say 200-400 (i think 400 is his max he can do maybe a hair more if its like 429 or something like that he is trying to get other stuff also and has to figure in the overall cost) price point for someone starting out. they have a really old o scope which works kind of lol. i have not bought one in a good while so im not up to date on the current models out there. ill be teaching them as we go as long as i can continue to (cancer has spread unfortunately so i never know how long i will have)

appreciate the feedback

[james_s]

This has been discussed to death, nothing has really changed in the last 5 years or so, look for any of the threads on which scope to buy.

[mastershake]

well then are there any brands more reliable then others currently?

[Bionicbone]

If it helps I've been reading everything I can find and watched far too many YouTube videos. Conclusion, Rigol DS1054z with the 100mhz hack which is well documented and all the other extras are already unlocked now. Or the Rigol DS1104z Plus which is already 100mhz (no warranty breaking hack) and MSO ready (which to be fair most don't need or want or recommend really lol). If you can manage with 2 channels, then check out the Rigol DS1102Z-E, not sure how they can do it so cheap and when you check out the videos the Rigol always seem to come out best bang for the buck but there are cheaper options if you don't mind some crashing and small issues.
Just to say I'm not an expert, do your own research, just trying to save you getting  this headache and going round in circles lol.

[Fungus]

what is the most up to date recommended unit in the say 200-400

Exactly the same unit as four or five years ago.

This isn't a world that changes much.

[mwb1100]

Just to give you a leg up, contenders might be:

  - Rigol 1054z
  - Siglent SDS1104X-E
  - GW-Instek (I'm not very familiar with these)

The Rigol and Siglent mentioned above go for a bit over $400 unless you're willing to wait around for a promo or troll eBay for a nice, cheap used one. So you could also look into their 2 channel (or otherwise less featured) variations. Rigol and Siglent seem to generally own the "low end but good quality" space.

As other have mentioned, there are several threads and a gazillion posts about these low end (but very capable) oscilloscopes on the forum - you can easily spend dozens of hours researching.  Youtube is also a great resource/time-sink.

[james_s]

Like I said, it's been discussed to death, every question has been answered, thread after thread after thread, and now we have yet another thread. Rigol and Siglent are the two main players, they were the two main players several years ago. Both make good solid reliable products that deliver a lot of bang for the buck. In the price range listed I don't think there's anything else I would consider besides older Tek, HP/Agilent, LeCroy, etc but those I would look at more as a fun project or a way to get higher end features at a hobbyist friendly price rather than a first/only scope for a beginner.

[tautech]

what is the most up to date recommended unit in the say 200-400 (i think 400 is his max he can do maybe a hair more if its like 429 or something like that he is trying to get other stuff also and has to figure in the overall cost) price point for someone starting out. they have a really old o scope which works kind of lol. i have not bought one in a good while so im not up to date on the current models out there. ill be teaching them as we go as long as i can continue to (cancer has spread unfortunately so i never know how long i will have)

appreciate the feedback

Good luck with your health challenges. 
 
You didn't say 2 or 4ch and for a learner 2ch is often enough with SDS1202X-E a good choice not needing to learn how to use multiplexed vertical controls, something for the novice that can be confusing.
If 4 channels is a must have there are a few to choose from within your budget and SDS1104X-U comes in just under it. Otherwise if bells and whistles are important SDS1104X-E is the one to go for but it's $499.

[Sredni]

If you are on a budget and do not mind cumbersome interfaces, you might also consider a portable oscilloscope like the OwON HDS2102S which combine multimeter, function generator and 100 MHz portable oscilloscope with two channels. I am not a fan of 'all-in-one' solutions but you might be. There are versions without the function generator and 70MHz only that cost less.

[tatel]

I think GW-Instek GDS1054B could be the cheapest one in the US at about $350? Mine is better than me.

[jasonRF]

Another standard option is the siglent sds1104x-u.  It doesn’t have all the features of the sds1104x-e, but it is cheaper.   Right now it is $315 from amazon
https://www.amazon.com/Siglent-Technologies-SDS1104X-U-Phosphor-Oscilloscopes/dp/B08PD3WKCZ?th=1

[Bionicbone]

The thing that sways me away from Siglent to Rigol in this price range is the memory depth. But maybe I am missing something. Siglent state 14mpts (2 X 7mpts for 4 ch) and Rigol just state 24Mpts. I'll do some bus work so thinking 24Mpts is a key factor. Would you experienced guys agree? Or is there something about Siglent scopes that you think is a better trade ? Also I remembered Siglent support more decoders, I'm very interested in CAN Bus support.

[james_s]

The thing that sways me away from Siglent to Rigol in this price range is the memory depth. But maybe I am missing something. Siglent state 14mpts (2 X 7mpts for 4 ch) and Rigol just state 24Mpts. I'll do some bus work so thinking 24Mpts is a key factor. Would you experienced guys agree? Or is there something about Siglent scopes that you think is a better trade ? Also I remembered Siglent support more decoders, I'm very interested in CAN Bus support.

14mpts is *huge* from my perspective. My main scope has the deep memory option which gives it 8mpts which was massive at the time it was made and I very rarely make use of anywhere close to that. What do you need so much capture memory for? It's a scope, not a chart recorder.

If you're interested in capturing and decoding buses get a logic analyzer, the cheap USB ones are quite capable and will do a better job at this task than just about any scope. Use a scope when you want to check signal integrity.

[tautech]

The thing that sways me away from Siglent to Rigol in this price range is the memory depth. But maybe I am missing something. Siglent state 14mpts (2 X 7mpts for 4 ch) and Rigol just state 24Mpts. I'll do some bus work so thinking 24Mpts is a key factor. Would you experienced guys agree? Or is there something about Siglent scopes that you think is a better trade ? Also I remembered Siglent support more decoders, I'm very interested in CAN Bus support.

You need be aware some lower priced DSO's use a single ADC and others use 2 ADC's each with their own memory support.
Eg. SDS11/1204X-E uses 2 ADC's each with 14 Mpts memory support.
With this configuration 2 channels, one on each ADC can be provided with 14 Mpts mem depth on each. However engage a 3rd or a 2nd channel on the same ADC and everything halves, sampling rate and memory support.

The work around for some is to provide more memory when a single ADC is used however when a 2nd channel is activated sampling rates are halved, something a dual ADC DSO doesn't suffer from when channel allocation is used wisely.

[Bionicbone]

https://youtu.be/wZQj7TnWVNg I think a really good side by side comparison tests between the DS1104Z Plus and SDS1104X-E. Each seems to be better at different things. Rigol gets to 160mhz at -3db and 400mhz showing a signal. The Siglent is 117mhz and 140mhz bombs out. But the speed of the Siglent is much better, he says brighter screen, faster updates, but there sometimes seems some display issues on square waves (need to watch that bit again). I think when I first looked at this video I was drawn to the 400mhz thing just mentioned and memory but now I'm questioning memory especially given the responses below. Is the 400mhz thing a big positive that would sway the experts?

[james_s]

"Showing a signal" is useless. If you are that far beyond the rated bandwidth you have no idea if what the scope is showing you bears any resemblance to what the signal actually looks like.

[Bionicbone]

Thanks, I do have a cheapo logic analyzer that I can use with pulseview. When I started looking at this I was thinking the scope "Decoder" would bring further options but slowly discovering this is not the case in terms of data analysis. I think the scope would have saved my squeaky bum though when I first connected my home made CAN device to the car without first checking signal integrity, especially the acknowledge signal which I think I manage to disable.

Really interesting about the memory depth, these are the things that are designed to draw in a newbie, and why forums like this and the people like yourself are invaluable. Thanks.

[Bionicbone]

Crikey, something else to read up and check about 😄
I may have to bite the bullet here, buy one of the two on my list and learn lessons once I know what I'm doing lol
Probably the Rigol just because it's available through Amazon and they don't mess around if there's an issue.
Thanks for the great info.

[james_s]

Additional memory depth doesn't really hurt, and unlike in the past, memory is cheap now. It's not something I avoid, it just isn't something that would be a deciding factor for me either.

[2N3055]

https://youtu.be/wZQj7TnWVNg I think a really good side by side comparison tests between the DS1104Z Plus and SDS1104X-E. Each seems to be better at different things. Rigol gets to 160mhz at -3db and 400mhz showing a signal. The Siglent is 117mhz and 140mhz bombs out. But the speed of the Siglent is much better, he says brighter screen, faster updates, but there sometimes seems some display issues on square waves (need to watch that bit again). I think when I first looked at this video I was drawn to the 400mhz thing just mentioned and memory but now I'm questioning memory especially given the responses below. Is the 400mhz thing a big positive that would sway the experts?

First, SDS1104X-E is 200MHz design. There is a SDS1204X-E. That is same hardware...
Second, SDS1104X-E has two ADC. Meaning it has minimum 500MS/s with 4ch, and 2ch with full 1 GS/s sampling rate. Compared to min 250 MS/s for DS1054Z.
Also that means that it has 2x14MPts banks. With 1 and 2 ch it has 14MPts and 7MPts 4ch.
In segmented memory mode it has much more memory, in excess of 50-60 Mpts..
Compared to DS1054Z that goes 24/12/6MPts.. No real segmented memory mode, it has recording but you cannot use it for anything..
Also SDS1104X-E has up to 500uV/div real hardware preamp and low noise input. It has color grading display.. 1MPts FFT, Bode plot II...
More decodes (CAN for instance). etc..etc..etc.

Little DS1054Z is cute little bugger that is good value for money. SDS1104X-E is a class above scope that is already at level of using it for entry level professional work.

Both are good choice, but, if you have money go for SDS1104X-E... It's just better.
I have no personal experience with GW instek 1000 series.

[nctnico]

https://youtu.be/wZQj7TnWVNg I think a really good side by side comparison tests between the DS1104Z Plus and SDS1104X-E. Each seems to be better at different things. Rigol gets to 160mhz at -3db and 400mhz showing a signal. The Siglent is 117mhz and 140mhz bombs out. But the speed of the Siglent is much better, he says brighter screen, faster updates, but there sometimes seems some display issues on square waves (need to watch that bit again). I think when I first looked at this video I was drawn to the 400mhz thing just mentioned and memory but now I'm questioning memory especially given the responses below. Is the 400mhz thing a big positive that would sway the experts?

You might want to check out the GW Instek GDS1054B as well but it depends on your location whether it is cheaper or not. If you need bus decoding, this is the only model at the low end that decodes the entire memory and not just what is on screen compared to Rigol / Siglent (the latter becomes a problem when the start of a message is not on the screen). Another handy feature is signal filtering.

[mwb1100]

The thing that sways me away from Siglent to Rigol in this price range is the memory depth. But maybe I am missing something. Siglent state 14mpts (2 X 7mpts for 4 ch) and Rigol just state 24Mpts.

Small correction - from the DS1000Z datasheet: "24 Mpts (single-channel), 12 Mpts (dual-channel), 6 Mpts (three/four-channel)"

[n4u]

IMO spending too much on first scope isnt worth it. U may easily damage it. But some old analog, or tds210 etc - they arent as good as chinese scope like rigol1024 etc but they are cheap - u can spend cash on sth u will use more frequently - like soldering station, or multimeter. For automatic logic state reading u can buy logic state analyzer.

[james_s]

Where are you finding TDS210 scopes cheap? They've always been overpriced IMO, I don't recall ever seeing a bargain on one. Good working analog scopes are getting a lot harder to come by too, they're almost all more than 20 years old now.

And really, it's 2023, we have autocomplete and autocorrect, and bandwidth is cheap, is there really any reason to use "u" instead of "you"?

[jonpaul]

I would avoid the Chinese digital scopes.

A beginner can easily find a 2 ch 10..50 MHz vintage analog scope for $/€ 25..100.

Hameg, Philips, Tektronix HP.

We found a,Hameg HM103 in Paris at a flea market is €5, ans another Hameg, HM203 at a,street market forward €25

Both still,working

Jon

[tautech]

Where are you finding TDS210 scopes cheap? They've always been overpriced IMO, I don't recall ever seeing a bargain on one. Good working analog scopes are getting a lot harder to come by too, they're almost all more than 20 years old now.

100 %

The newbie is a little foolish if they overlook a reasonably modern DSO.
At some point in our scope apprenticeships we have all needed guidance which is where capturing a screenshot to USB is so so convenient. In it after little description we can see a waveform capture and if done with some care all the important scope settings.
When I brought my first, a Tek TDS2012B, some years before Siglent came into my life, USB screenshots was a nonnegotiable feature required.
Nice DSO it was too but soon you require more than the pitiful memory depth old DSO's offered.

[tautech]

I would avoid the Chinese digital scopes.

Of course you would, being from another age where all that was available was CRO's.
We live in a vastly different age today.

[2N3055]

I would avoid the Chinese digital scopes.

A beginner can easily find a 2 ch 10..50 MHz vintage analog scope for $/€ 25..100.

Hameg, Philips, Tektronix HP.

We found a,Hameg HM103 in Paris at a flea market is €5, ans another Hameg, HM203 at a,street market forward €25

Both still,working

Jon

And I would avoid old crap that I spend more time repairing then using...
Even a good, working, 100MHz analog CRT scope is today outclassed on so many levels by these "Chinese" entry level scopes...

People today that are learning how to use scope need to know how to use scopes of today and tomorrow. Not how it was done 40 years ago..
You and I have warm and fuzzy memories of how magical it was to use your first Tek scope in those days. That is all. It's nostalgia. Of the time long gone...
Sorry...  I miss those simpler days too...

[nctnico]

Agreed. No need for the old crap. When visiting my parents I like to see my first analog scope still sitting in my old and what is now my father's electronics lab but I'd hate having to use it again. My 2nd scope was a DSO and I never looked back.

[james_s]

I love my analog scope and still use it sometimes, and when they were cheap and easy to find I would often advise beginners start with one but that was 10-20 years ago and things have changed. Analog scopes aren't nearly as easy to find as they used to be, especially good working ones. Some of the better ones have achieved collectible status and prices have gone up a bit. The better Chinese DSOs are very good for what they cost.

[Fungus]

I would avoid the Chinese digital scopes.

A beginner can easily find a 2 ch 10..50 MHz vintage analog scope for $/€ 25..100.

Oh, don't be silly.

We found a,Hameg HM103 in Paris at a flea market is €5, ans another Hameg, HM203 at a,street market forward €25

Can they stop the signal and zoom in? How about some on-screen measurements, can they do that? Not even the frequency of the signal...?? How about serial decodes or FFT?

How much space do they take up on the bench? How many years of life do you think they've still got in them?

[mastershake]

i have personally multiple scopes some costing way more then these recc. remember this is for someone who wants to learn and end up doing some repair work for people as he does. i have been doing this for almost 30 years i just dont have to much exp with the very latest models and he asked me about them specifically and i had to say im not sure but i will ask. what i want for him is something to learn everything he needs to but also something he can in the future use as a bit more professional unit. eventually im sure he will upgrade as he can i did offer him one of my old ancient ones that still works fine but he wants to buy his own equipment and i respect that and admire that. its not all the time when you find someone who doesnt want handouts but wants to pave their own way.

some of these look great for him the i personally do not have any exp with the gw instek ones either so im curious myself lol damn it now i may have to buy something as a new toy lol.

[james_s]

Can they stop the signal and zoom in? How about some on-screen measurements, can they do that? Not even the frequency of the signal...?? How about serial decodes or FFT?

How much space do they take up on the bench? How many years of life do you think they've still got in them?

Does it matter if it can do those things if they aren't features you need? People got by with analog scopes for many years and they can still do everything they ever could. If you need to measure the frequency you can use a frequency counter. If you need to decode serial you can use a logic analyzer. If you need FFT you can use a sound card or spectrum analyzer. A modern DSO is clearly superior today for almost everything but that doesn't mean an analog scope has no value. If you can find a good working analog scope for a low price then grab it, the best scope is whatever one you can get your hands on. If you're going to go out and buy something though the Rigol and Siglent DSOs offer an incredible amount of value for the money. If they weren't available I'd recommend an older analog scope but they are available and they're cheap enough that it's not worth messing with old stuff unless you want to mess with old stuff.

[Fungus]

People got by with analog scopes for many years and they can still do everything they ever could.

People got by with slide rules for 300 years before the first affordable calculator but slide rules vanished very soon afterwards.

TLDR; A DSO can give you a lot more information a lot more quickly than a CRO.

[james_s]

People got by with slide rules for 300 years before the first affordable calculator but slide rules vanished very soon afterwards.

TLDR; A DSO can give you a lot more information a lot more quickly than a CRO.

And if calculators were still hundreds of dollars and slide rules were cheap, it would make sense for people on a budget to pick up slide rules.

If you know how to use a CRO it can get you all the information you need, it's just not as straightfoward, I suspect you have never really used one beyond playing around. Even having a DSO, things like measuring frequency, decoding serial and viewing spectrum are better done with dedicated instruments.

[tautech]

Even having a DSO, things like measuring frequency, decoding serial and viewing spectrum are better done with dedicated instruments.

Sure, but at how much additional cost ?

As you have already said the feature set of the modern DSO is outstanding and because of that we often don't need additional equipment.
Many hobbyists are severely space constrained which adds further to the attractiveness of the modern DSO.

[Fungus]

And if calculators were still hundreds of dollars and slide rules were cheap, it would make sense for people on a budget to pick up slide rules.

No it wouldn't because:
a) Using a slide rule is much slower and more error-prone, and
b) The number of hours needed to become good at using one also costs you money.
c) Slide rules only give you 2-3 digits of precision no matter how good you are with one.

[james_s]

No it wouldn't because:
a) Using a slide rule is much slower and more error-prone, and
b) The number of hours needed to become good at using one also costs you money.
c) Slide rules only give you 2-3 digits of precision no matter how good you are with one.

That depends on budget and needs, in the real world you get what you can afford that meets your needs.

I still don't think you've ever used a CRO beyond just playing around. They're far more capable than you give them credit.

[pdenisowski]

And if calculators were still hundreds of dollars and slide rules were cheap, it would make sense for people on a budget to pick up slide rules.

When I was a (starving) grad school student I spent the equivalent of two months of food money to buy an HP48G calculator. 

Sure I could have kept inverting matrices by hand , but sometimes new technology offers improvements that justify a substantial increase in cost.

When TI first introduced portable calculators that could do things like roots, powers, logs, and trig, the slide rules vanished from my high school almost overnight .....

[pdenisowski]

People got by with slide rules for 300 years before the first affordable calculator but slide rules vanished very soon afterwards.

Don't forget the "CRC Standard Mathematical Tables" book.  I was still using my copy long after calculators became a thing ....

[james_s]

There is also a far greater difference in capability and usability between a slide rule and a calculator than there is between a CRO and DSO. The one killer feature that a DSO offers is single shot capture and there were analog storage CROs that could do this too. The readouts and measurements are nice, but again quite a few of the later CROs had this feature too. Lacking it, reading the graticule is not difficult, the readout just adds a bit of convenience. Even without storage a scope camera enabled single shot capture. FFT is unique to a DSO but in my experience it isn't really all that useful, it's not nearly as good as a proper spectrum analyzer. I used analog scopes for ~15 years before I ever had a DSO, I think the DSO is a significant improvement in almost every way, but I can still pull out the analog scope and use it for most things, it's not a laborious chore like doing complex calculations by hand. It shows me the waveform and that's all I really need most of the time. A DSO is just a refinement that adds some abilities and convenience.

[mastershake]

he said he was browsing around and asked me today about hantek (on aliexpress) any thoughts from anyone here on those i notice in reading some hate them and some seem to like them. just curious.

[Bionicbone]

Me too to be honest, although too late, the new Siglent SDS1104x-e arrived yesterday.

The problem is with the "nothings changed in years" thing means here are so many videos over the years that covers everything but some \ most \ all issues have been resolved.

In the end I went Siglent since the business it's self suggest that's they would need to be in the later group, but the cheaper end I suspect could be one of the former.

I never did find a video pitching the best in each class, very cheap, budget, quality budget together from a new to scopes hobbyist point of view and where each would become a problem on the learning journey. It seems obvious to me that someone who's been using scopes for years would probably get frustrated with a scope not as quick or had advanced limitations, but as a newbie I seemed to keep getting pushed up the scale because I just wasn't sure if things would quickly hold me back.

That said, I am happy with my decision, I feel it should get me as far as I want to go or get to, and I won't be left wondering, scope issue or circuit? (I hope).

[n4u]

I was out of date, pricing went up these days. There was time when u could buy analog or old dso for about 100USD, now you should stick with rigol - old one are overpriced ...

[robert.rozee]

he said he was browsing around and asked me today about hantek (on aliexpress) any thoughts from anyone here on those i notice in reading some hate them and some seem to like them. just curious.

DSO2C10, DSO2C15, DSO2D10, DSO2D15: a relatively new model. people seem to have various problems with firmware bugs, and they seem to be designed and built to a very low price point. i'd personally not recommend them unless your budget is very constrained, and advise to keep your expectations quite low. having said that, they are better than no scope!

there is also Hantek's DSO5072P that he may have seen and has been around for quite a number of years. relatively small memory depth (40kpts i think) and they seem to have a propensity to occasionally blow up their power supply or corrupt internal firmware. again, only consider if your budget is constrained and keep your expectations low.

as for AliExpress: don't touch with a barge-pole! you will have next to no backup if anything goes wrong such as a warranty claim. i buy quite a bit from Ebay (china), and occasionally from AliExpress, but only small items where i am happy to write off the purchase if the purchase turns out to be a dud. small components and electronic modules, nothing costing more than a few dollars.

my scope recommendation would be to go for Siglent, their models are a generation newer than Rigol's DS1054z et al. OR, if he can find a cheap/small transistorized CRO built post-1980 for us$30 or less, get that as a stopgap until he decides upon a DSO. a CRO is still usable for many things, but as others have said a DSO can do a whole lot more.


all 100% opinion, of course!

cheers,
rob   :-)

[Fungus]

he said he was browsing around and asked me today about hantek (on aliexpress) any thoughts from anyone here on those i notice in reading some hate them and some seem to like them. just curious.

Hanteks might look the same as Rigols/Siglents/Insteks in photos but they're usually very feature-poor and buggy by comparison.

[Fungus]

People got by with slide rules for 300 years before the first affordable calculator but slide rules vanished very soon afterwards.

Don't forget the "CRC Standard Mathematical Tables" book.  I was still using my copy long after calculators became a thing ....

I've got some somewhere.

(4, 5 and 6-digit...)

[Fungus]

I was out of date, pricing went up these days. There was time when u could buy analog or old dso for about 100USD, now you should stick with rigol - old one are overpriced ...

Prices went up and they're all ten years older than before.

[mastershake]

gotcha on the hantek's i think the only reason he was looking is due to the sale they are running now where they are something like 55$ or more off the price but def doesnt sound like something either one of of us are interested in me for teaching or him for the bugs and issues. the hantek model i think he was looking at was the DSO4254B if im correct. he also noted the owon and unit-t brands there.

he seems to be leaning towards the siglent unit i believe vs the rigol but as long as either will be a good unit for him im sure whichever he goes with should work out great. thank you all so much for the help.

[BillyO]

Avoid UNI-T.  They do not know the meaning of the word "support".

BTW, if you have an expensive mechanical switch keyboard I'd be interested in buying your shift key switches.  Some of the punctuation switches might be interest too as they are apparently unused.