Products > Test Equipment
Siglent SDS1104X-E vs. Rigol DS1054Z Advice?
<< < (39/86) > >>
nctnico:

--- Quote from: KungFuJosh on August 28, 2018, 04:12:00 pm ---
--- Quote from: nctnico on August 28, 2018, 03:44:31 pm ---Rigol didn't invent the low end market! There have been cheap oscilloscopes for decades.

--- End quote ---
Seriously? I'm not talking about the garbage low-end market. I'm talking about the quality, entry-level scope market. There was nothing of that level of quality, in that price range before.

--- End quote ---
Sure there was. You make it look like the Rigol DS1000Z has set some kind of standard but you are forgetting that:
1) The Rigol DS1000Z isn't exactly a very good oscilloscope when looking at performance & features and it has taken years to get all the bugs fixed.
2) There are and have been other oscilloscopes from various manufacturers which also sell / sold very well into the entry level market.
3) When everyone was still working with analog oscilloscopes you could buy cheap low end analog oscilloscope as well. The only thing that changed is that technology has improved.
KungFuJosh:

--- Quote from: nctnico on August 28, 2018, 07:01:08 pm ---Sure there was. You make it look like the Rigol DS1000Z has set some kind of standard but you are forgetting that:
1) The Rigol DS1000Z isn't exactly a very good oscilloscope when looking at performance & features and it has taken years to get all the bugs fixed.
2) There are and have been other oscilloscopes from various manufacturers which also sell / sold very well into the entry level market.
3) When everyone was still working with analog oscilloscopes you could buy cheap low end analog oscilloscope as well. The only thing that changed is that technology has improved.

--- End quote ---

I believe you're joking now. :palm:

1) Include price in that equation, and you've had zero competition, literally until now.
2) None of them with the specs of the Rigol. Price Point + Technology Level = Niche Market. Cornered from 2014 to 2018. I'm guessing they're still dominating that market for now.
3) Yes, the tech has improved. That's the point. High or low-end, most of those scopes you refer to can't keep up with the entry-level Rigol from 2014.

You can still buy cheap low-end analog scopes. That's not the point. They're not as good, and they never were! You can make biased statements about the poor quality and performance of the Rigol all day long, but you prove nothing with generalized baseless claims. Obviously the 2014 $350 scope's front-end isn't going to be as clean as a current production $12,000 scope's front-end. That's a pointless comparison. Even comparing it to a newer $500 scope's front-end, you should expect the newer, more expensive scope to be cleaner. This seems like it should be obvious.

This, by the way, coming from somebody who returned his Rigol to buy a Siglent, because I believe it to be superior. That doesn't mean the Rigol doesn't have its strengths, and that doesn't change the past 4 years of the Rigol's dominance in its niche.
SMB784:

--- Quote from: KungFuJosh on August 28, 2018, 07:40:04 pm ---
--- Quote from: nctnico on August 28, 2018, 07:01:08 pm ---Sure there was. You make it look like the Rigol DS1000Z has set some kind of standard but you are forgetting that:
1) The Rigol DS1000Z isn't exactly a very good oscilloscope when looking at performance & features and it has taken years to get all the bugs fixed.
2) There are and have been other oscilloscopes from various manufacturers which also sell / sold very well into the entry level market.
3) When everyone was still working with analog oscilloscopes you could buy cheap low end analog oscilloscope as well. The only thing that changed is that technology has improved.

--- End quote ---

I believe you're joking now. :palm:

1) Include price in that equation, and you've had zero competition, literally until now.
2) None of them with the specs of the Rigol. Price Point + Technology Level = Niche Market. Cornered from 2014 to 2018. I'm guessing they're still dominating that market for now.
3) Yes, the tech has improved. That's the point. High or low-end, most of those scopes you refer to can't keep up with the entry-level Rigol from 2014.

You can still buy cheap low-end analog scopes. That's not the point. They're not as good, and they never were! You can make biased statements about the poor quality and performance of the Rigol all day long, but you prove nothing with generalized baseless claims. Obviously the 2014 $350 scope's front-end isn't going to be as clean as a current production $12,000 scope's front-end. That's a pointless comparison. Even comparing it to a newer $500 scope's front-end, you should expect the newer, more expensive scope to be cleaner. This seems like it should be obvious.

This, by the way, coming from somebody who returned his Rigol to buy a Siglent, because I believe it to be superior. That doesn't mean the Rigol doesn't have its strengths, and that doesn't change the past 4 years of the Rigol's dominance in its niche.

--- End quote ---

You've made a solid decision based on your specific needs and the known facts about your instrument of choice.  Rest assured that you have made the right choice, and I'm certain that device will serve you well for many years.
tautech:

--- Quote from: Old Printer on August 28, 2018, 04:48:05 pm ---Has anyone seen a compsarison of the Siglent & Rigol vs the GDS-1054B?  I really like the 4 individual channel knobs and I would really like HDMI or VGA output but that gets into another price bracket.

--- End quote ---
Don't thinks one has been done yet.

WRT a video output, the 4ch X-E's fast LAN and WiFi performance is such the inbuilt webserver provides great remote display performance. Some demonstration of this can be see in Jason's video starting from here:
https://youtu.be/Cxh_Liay09E?t=52
wpwrak:

--- Quote from: nctnico on August 28, 2018, 07:01:08 pm ---Sure there was.

--- End quote ---

For example the Rigol DS1000CD/D/E series: 1 GSa/s (this is still the same in the entry-level segment today), 1 MSa memory (as one would expect, this has gone up since, 12/24 MSa for the DS1000Z). Decent enough build quality and came with borderline (*) decent PC connectivity (USB), while others had that as an option, RS232, or not at all. (* at least in the 1000CD, it's very slow. I suspect there is a UART-USB translation in the scope.)

CD and D also has digital channels, though at least the CD had so poor signal integrity that you had to be quite desperate in order to try to use it. (I have an 1102CD, which has now been replaced by the Siglent 1104X-E.)

All these had only two analog channels. There was also a four-channel 1000B series, but with short capture memory. The main new features (for the low-cost segment) of the 1000Z were to combine four analog channels with long memory, and to add Ethernet. So it's really just an evolution, but one that hit a sweet spot. And of course the ability to unlock expensive options for free made it incredibly attractive. I think this may have been the real killer feature.
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