Products > Test Equipment
Rigol DSO2302A or DHO1072?
NE666:
--- Quote from: Fotom on August 25, 2023, 11:44:29 pm ---I want to control several ECU on CAN (max speed 500kB/s) and LIN for functional tests. Maybe there will be FlexRay come to it as well. Not sure about the specs there, but 70MHz should be fine.
--- End quote ---
If you're working predominantly in the digital domain, another consideration for you might be the Rigol MSO5000. Not 12-bit but perfectly useable and very well suited to digital. All versions have 16 digital channels (although you'll need the additional LA cable, which is not inexpensive, unless you purchase a clone on eBay) and the 4 (analogue) channel version seems to have a number of offers around at this time, including all protocol decodes "free" (including FlexRay). Easily hackable to 350Mhz bandwidth. Nice 9" screen.
You may benefit from (probably will *need*, at some point) a standalone LA/protocol analyser too but that goes for any MSO of any brand. An MSO is not a LA, in exactly the same way that a LA isn't an MSO.
Or, if time is on your side, you could perhaps consider the new Rigol DHO900 series, which "has the best of both worlds", in that it has digital (MSO) capability plus 4 16-bit analogue channels. Pricing could be very competitive but it's not on general sale in Europe yet and the jury is thus out on it. There is suggestion that Dave may carry a review of it (or the DHO800) in the coming days. In my view, the 7" screen is a bit questionable for an MSO but the form-factor is closer to your MicSig. The biggest issue may be that it looks as if you won't see a shipment until well into October, if not later, so it is also vapourware (like the 2000X HD) at this time for all practical purposes.
tautech:
--- Quote from: nctnico on August 27, 2023, 09:07:15 am ---
--- Quote from: tautech on August 27, 2023, 12:43:50 am ---
--- Quote from: nctnico on August 27, 2023, 12:01:13 am ---BTW: I specifically left Lecroy out because their scopes are more geared towards analog signal analysis and thus are less usefull for general purpose digital / analog debugging work.
--- End quote ---
Garbage. :bullshit:
https://www.teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/wavesurfer-3000z-oscilloscopes
https://www.teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/t3dso3000-series-oscilloscopes
https://www.teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/t3dso2000-series-oscilloscopes
https://www.teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/t3dso1000-series-oscilloscopes
However LeCroy pricing vs OEM is another matter.
--- End quote ---
None of those are real Lecroy scopes!
--- End quote ---
You mean like some HPAK scopes were Rigols ?
--- Quote ---Lecroy always has been rebadging other brands (like Iwatsu as well) to fill in the gaps in their lineup; especially at the lower end. And you known that very well.
--- End quote ---
I do.
However I won't go making generalizations without qualification as you have.
15 years back I looked hard at a GW Instek and thought they were overpriced and nearly brought a Uni-t instead :phew: but instead opted for a Tek TDS2000B a vastly better DSO than either ...... at that time.
However these days the last in the above list of LeCroy's DSO's would blow its socks off and my SDS1104X-E has certainly lasted longer than that Tek.
--- Quote from: NE666 on August 27, 2023, 09:53:09 am --- so it is also vapourware (like the 2000X HD) at this time for all practical purposes.
--- End quote ---
Error ^
https://www.siglenteu.com/digital-oscilloscopes/sds2000x-hd-digital-storage-oscilloscope/
My SDS1204X HD is not a figment of imagination.
https://www.siglent.com/products-overview/sds1000x-hd/
NE666:
However these days the last in the above list of LeCroy's DSO's would blow its socks off and my SDS1104X-E has certainly lasted longer than that Tek.
--- Quote from: tautech on August 27, 2023, 10:21:10 am ---
--- Quote from: NE666 on August 27, 2023, 09:53:09 am --- so it is also vapourware (like the 2000X HD) at this time for all practical purposes.
--- End quote ---
Error ^
https://www.siglenteu.com/digital-oscilloscopes/sds2000x-hd-digital-storage-oscilloscope/
My SDS1204X HD is not a figment of imagination.
https://www.siglent.com/products-overview/sds1000x-hd/
--- End quote ---
With apologies, indeed my unintended error. I wrote 2000X HD but was thinking 1000X HD, which speculation so far has placed within approximately the same price range as the scopes in the OP's original question.
Fotom:
I thank you all for your interesting different points of view and all the very useful input to think about.
I do understand the point of usability. The GW Instek and R&S scopes are slightly different in the front end, compared to the "usual all in one scopes". But they all come down to the main "Auto" button which I will use in 99% of all test scenarios. But why not, it was invented and I pay for it, so it should work for me... 8)
The bandwidth is maybe not the big point. All ECUs work with around 12V DC. The need for bus traffic is the nut breaker, but with around 500kB on CAN and the need of minimum 2 channels to compare the signal integrity the need is not so high. Not sure what speed LIN has but much less than CAN. FlexRay could get interesting, too, and should be much faster. But the MicSig has that capability and with 4 channels and 100MHz it is ok for that I guess. On my test- bench it should work as well.
So the need for an ultra accurate scope might not be in my main focus. But why not looking for wide bandwidths and fast sampling rate?
I use every equipment (tools or other gear) by reading the manual first. Ok, a hammer is maybe clear to use. But in this particular case the MicSig disappointed. The comedians at MicSig have changed ground and calibration signal and the owners manual showed a picture where there is vice versa. When calibrating the first time the scope showed a lot of interesting things but no 1kHz calibration signal. So, even the expensive gear is equivalent to the cheap stuff... at the end I think it is sometimes learning by doing. And I know: A fool with a tool is still a fool...
I would rather prefer R&S, but that would be way too much money spend in a testing device that I would use only for 15% of its possibilities, especially its accuracy. So why not looking for something cheaper? But I do not want to buy old stuff if I can get newer and better gear for the same money or even less. I would not hesitate to invest more money, but the question is: What for and what will it be used?
The use of a tool sometimes comes up when it is available. But if someone has other opinions I am still open minded.
nctnico:
Maybe you should rephrase the question: what capabilities are you looking for that the MicSig oscilloscope you have doesn't provide? From experience I know this kind of question (in general) can be a very though one to find a clear answer for especially if you want to spend your money wisely.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version