Another that can be thrown in the mix is SDS6000 that should not be too far from release.
Definitely worth checking, thanks. The issue with this is my same concern about the Rigol, in that I'm not sure I should rely on a Rigol or a Siglent for professional use. If it were for hobby or occasional use it would be a no-brainer and I would probably prefer a Siglent over a Rigol for that. It would probably be also a no-brainer as a second/spare scope for professional use. There are two things at play here, first I absolutely need a scope that is reliable all the time and gives accurate and dependable readings all the time. If I even have a doubt on a measurement it's essentially unusable, and I cannot afford to waste hours here and there troubleshooting or working around scope bugs. I don't mind if the UI is weird or if I have to press 10 buttons instead of one, as long as it is functional. The second thing is that although my business is on the smaller end, I often compete or collaborate with much bigger companies so having quality 'brand name' tools can be an advantage in such cases. Still the prospective of saving some $10-20k and still having a tool that gets the job done for a business of my size is very inviting.
BTW, with such a budget, why not the new R&S RTO6? 
Thanks for the tip, definitely interesting!
The only disappointment about the RTO6 is it seems to only have an 8-bit hardware ADC, otherwise it seems a really good fit.
As for "fit for professional use" we passed that point half a decade ago..
At this point, quality or dependability is on par with A brands. They are still lagging a bit in depth of analysis options, but mostly at high end. In entry level and mid range, they are getting close, and quick.
They are working tirelessly on it.
Also why presume anything is weird in U/I? They are no better or worse than A brands. Problem with all new scopes is the they are COMPLICATED. They have so much measurements and analysis options that it takes time to learn what is there in a first place, much less where it is.
For that problem, new touchscreen scopes are much better, and having tried most of the brands (Keysight, R&S, LeCroy, Rigol, Siglent) I would say it is more of a style difference than anything else. LeCroy, R&S and Siglent take more modern full touch screen interface approach, and Keysight and Rigol are more of standard scope with touch added approach. They all take a week or two to get used to, and then you simply use it and don't think about it anymore.
Also, "brand name tools" as advantage to customer is a moot point. If customers trust you, they will not go into that. If they don't, fancy tools are waste of money. You won't get the job. Also, if I was your customer, I would rather you have Siglent or Rigol under maintenance interval and freshly calibrated, than 15 years old Big Brand that was never calibrated.
I would pay more attention to quality and completeness of your documentation that what logo is on scope screenshots.
I see more and more research papers that use Siglent and Rigol in it with no shame. Whatever prejudice is there will dissipate in next few years.
I had only one encounter where customer made a comment "that he would like that i calibrated it with proper equipment" meaning Fluke or Keysight. On which I answered that my meter was in official calibration cycle, that it was order of magnitude better than was needed, and that I will gladly make an wager with him: I would take (or he can) somewhere and verify calibration on "propper gear", and if it was out of cal I would gladly pay for all expenses. But if I was right, he would pay for the pleasure out of his pocket. At which point it was suddenly fun and games "we were just joking" moment... Customers are always right, up to the point where they aren't. And they always have "special requests" until the point they have to pay for the pleasure. Then suddenly "standard service" is good enough.
If you do stumble upon customer or job that simply require special equipment you don't have, include it in cost of project and rent it. You always say to your customers that you have fine very well equipped lab, but is need arises that you rent special equipment. So they can rest assured that you have best tools at your disposal, and pass the savings to them by managing the cost of equipment by prioritizing what you purchase. Sometimes project will buy you a whole instrument if it makes sense financially and you can integrate it in cost structure.
As for 8-bit hardware, going over 2 GHz and more than 8 bit A/D is not very common, and gets expensive fast. Also, despite claimed resolution, ENOB will be different story.
For looking at jitter and eyes, and fast protocols, 8 bit is more than enough for the most purposes. At such bandwidths noise is getting to be big part of what you see on the screen. As I said, take a look at the ENOB numbers , that is more important.
There is a lot of merit for higher than 8 bit scopes at lower frequencies. For power electronics, having 12 bit is improvement. For lower frequencies, working on sensors and such, 16 bit is even better.
But those are special tools for special jobs. If you work on those jobs, you will need to get those tools separately. There is no scope that will do everything best. They will usually shine in one area and be usable elsewhere. For instance 8ch, 20MHz, 12 bit scope will work great for switchers, power electronics (frequency converters, motor drives) etc. You could check 7+1 AV receiver outputs all at the same time on single correlated plot. You can measure and monitor 3 Phase systems, 3 phases, V&A and PE current, all at the same time.
But it is only 20MHz. For you, something not useful at all. For power electronics guy, probably all the tool he will ever need.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
