Products > Test Equipment
Ridiculously small Rigol DS1000z series font size
<< < (11/35) > >>
marmad:

--- Quote from: i4004 on November 28, 2014, 09:10:39 pm ---a close inspection of a cellphone image?  :scared:

--- End quote ---

What are you talking about? It's a camera on a tripod - which is visible in the image. It seems as if you like to be regularly wrong about things, no?

But it's difficult to take a photo with equivalent intensity when they're stacked, due to the LCD viewing angles.
pa3bca:
I own both a 1074 and a 2072 and although the 2072 is larger and with 4 channels on the smaller 1074 display gets crowded I am quite pleased with the latter. No problem with my 54yrs old eyes (I am nearsighted so looking at the DSO without glasses). Perfectly readable for me. Certainly does not look washed out, on the contrary, it looks crisp and sharp to me (although a bit small  :) )
I too shot some photo's with a DSLR on a tripod. Photos of the 1074 and 2072 with identical (manual) settings and exactly the same distance from the scopes. Only the ambient lighting differs unavoidably (should not influence the screen too much)
See below:
 

Also two more closeups with a 100mm macro lens (no real macro fotos btw)

marmad:

--- Quote from: pa3bca on November 28, 2014, 10:49:42 pm ---Certainly does not look washed out, on the contrary, it looks crisp and sharp to me (although a bit small  :) )

--- End quote ---

I disagree. Even in your photos, I think it looks slightly less sharp and washed out compared to the DS2000 screen. But maybe I'm just more picky about my screens,  ;)
i4004:

--- Quote from: marmad on November 28, 2014, 09:31:55 pm ---
--- Quote from: i4004 on November 28, 2014, 09:10:39 pm ---a close inspection of a cellphone image?  :scared:

--- End quote ---

What are you talking about? It's a camera on a tripod - which is visible in the image. It seems as if you like to be regularly wrong about things, no?

But it's difficult to take a photo with equivalent intensity when they're stacked, due to the LCD viewing angles.

--- End quote ---

well yes, either a cellphone camera or a crappy camera <full stop>.
(and i wasn't wrong about 200pixels  :P )

notice pa3bca's images are better than yours..he has better camera...one that does less of a crappy noise reduction that just smears and blurs the image....so while i was wrong you just learned something new, right?  ;)


but here's a thing i see that perhaps makes you like 2k more: it has substiantially more 'vertical resolution' (hires mode on?) and there are less jaggies than in z image!
this is slightly visible in pa3bca's image too, but i used yours because it's higher res image.
and because it's better visible on AM signal.



so yes, i would pick 2k too, but because it is less jaggy, less lores....it seems to benefit from that virtual 12bit stuff....a lot! or is z just totally broken in this respect.
(notice how z has much more stairstepping on that sine outer curves)

but 2k not better because z is "washed out" as you say (if anything such lower vertical resolution will appear as having  more contrast/sharpness), but because it less jaggy.
and higher res is always better, with slightly less contrast or not.

so you're both right.
and me too!
 ;D

btw. could you make a screenshot (not a photograph) of this waveform on both scopes with hires mode off  (either here or in other thread where we discussed hires mode in more detail) so i can take a look at what exactly 2k does differently, when it comes to displaying it.
(or link a post if you already did it)
looking at this (and simillar screenshots i posted), resizer that maps 256 adc levels to display resolution on z is utter rubbish.
marmad:

--- Quote from: i4004 on November 29, 2014, 08:29:34 am ---...so while i was wrong you just learned something new, right?  ;)
--- End quote ---
Well, no - sorry, I have not learned anything new from your posts - which continue to be filled with loads of incorrect speculation and bad information.  :)


--- Quote ---....it seems to benefit from that virtual 12bit stuff....a lot!
--- End quote ---
There is no "virtual 12bit stuff". It seems you still don't understand how the DSOs are working. I suggest you go back and re-read the posts in the other thread.


--- Quote ---but 2k not better because z is "washed out" as you say (if anything such lower vertical resolution will appear as having  more contrast/sharpness), but because it less jaggy.
--- End quote ---
No, you're wrong again on multiple points. Either your eyes are bad, you don't use a color-corrected monitor, or you don't understand what you're looking at. There is no lower resolution - they are exactly the same - and the only thing that the DS1000Z has going for it is slightly more contrast (due to a brighter backlight). But it's "washed-out" and less "sharp" (this is NOT the same thing as contrast) because of it's worse sub-pixel anti-aliasing. This is apparent - even to those with poor vision :) - when you examine the images close-up (using pa3bca's photos) :

First, here is the rendering of "black" on both DSO screens - normal and inverted to "white". If it's not obvious which one is closer to true black, then you need a new computer monitor (or you need to calibrate the one you've got):




Secondly, here is an even more obvious look at the poor sub-pixel anti-aliasing (causing color fringing) on the DS1000Z screen (again, bottom image):





--- Quote ---and higher res is always better, with slightly less contrast or not.
--- End quote ---
I repeat: there is no higher res - they are both in Normal acquisition mode on displays of equivalent resolution.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod