review suggestion - handheld scopemeters - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: festus
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2011, 02:32:27 pm
content: I would suggest Dave do a video review of handheld scopemeters. How well they work for basic scope needs, and how well they work as a standard DMM when the scope functionality is not needed.

author: BrickBoiler
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2011, 03:54:40 pm
content: I would like to see some reviews on these as well. I have an old fluke 97 that I'm looking to replace. It has a green LCD that is getting harder and harder to read. A lot of people will say to just get a real bench scope with a battery pack, and I think they have a point, but I never do any real work at a bench. I just need to be able to check a VFD real quick, nothing too sophisticated. The things that matter to me are size, battery life, and safety. I'm leaning towards a fluke 123 now, I can't justify spending the bucks for one of the new 4 channel ones.

author: slburris
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2011, 03:42:57 am
content: It's not a Dave review (nothing is!), but I posted a teardown of myHantek DSO-1060 scopemeter and some tests here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=1449.0Scott

author: Haggai
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2011, 05:04:45 am
content: Good idea.The new generation of the nano scope should be included (http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/preorder-dso-quad-4-channel-digital-storage-oscilloscope-p-736.html?cPath=174).Looks like a major step forward from the original one.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 29, 2011, 12:58:01 pm
content: I have had a Fluke 98B series II and a Fluke 196B in the past, and now I have a Fluke 123 if you want to ask any specific questions.Alex

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2011, 04:20:39 pm
content: Quote from: Haggai on April 29, 2011, 05:04:45 amWhy do people always come up with this rubbish?

author: Haggai
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2011, 04:30:29 pm
content: Quote from: BoredAtWork on April 29, 2011, 04:20:39 pmSome people are not interested in multi hundred dollars high end equipment, don't want 20 years old CRT scopes, and don't really need anything more than (pocketable) dual channel 70MSa/s scopes.And it would be great to see how this simple scope (which I hope would sell for less than 100$ in a few months, like its predecessor) fares in comparison with the expensive ones, in tasks it was designed for.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 29, 2011, 07:10:02 pm
content: Quote from: Haggai on April 29, 2011, 04:30:29 pmthe only thing that make this comes true is if people dont buy it.

author: slburris
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2011, 03:31:20 am
content: The original DSO nano is firmly in the toy category. Come to think of it, so was my Velleman HPS5 which sampled at a whopping 500KhzNow the DSO Quad seems to have kicked things up a notch. I think it's out of the toy category and into the low end useful category. If it meets its specs....I've heard some early samples have been shipped but I have yet to see any comprehensive review of it.Scott

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2011, 06:01:24 am
content: Quote from: festus on April 28, 2011, 02:32:27 pmFairly poorly!That said, the little Tektronix DMM/DSO that I had occasion to use back around about 1999 was useable for repairing TVs & Picture Monitors,provided thatyou didn't have to look critically at video signals. As soon as an old analog with one faulty channel & triggering problems became available,I dropped the littleDSO like a hot potato!It was good for looking at car computer signals,though.The little Tek (it was about half the size of a laptop) was very expensive at the time,& I would have thought with years of development since,the cheapermanufacturers would have surpassed its performance by far.It certainly doesn't seem that way,although the benchtop models are about the same size & do have much improved performance.The units which are supposed to occupy the same niche,don't seem much better,& a lot are worse!VK6ZGO

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2011, 06:36:43 am
content: its a "contemporary" issue. its about what you "have/bought today" and what "available today" in term of price vs performance. if you buy it cheap or 2nd hand or thats all you can afford, then it will be a different story. if you buy it because its super light and small size, it will be a different story. and if you buy it because aesthetic and its cute, then it will be another different story. but as i understand this blog since "that time", reviewing toys is not gonna happen in Dave's dictionary. esp in this "hard economic downturn" time. but i believe Dave will do us a favor reviewing stuffs if he got enough $ from donation he collected. otherwise i suggest we just buy the tool that we want to get reviewed, and send it to Dave for the "professional" review or simply review it by ourself and post it here for others to benefit. if you expect one man's show (without a support), then its not gonna happen.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2011, 06:42:18 am
content: Quote from: slburris on April 30, 2011, 03:31:20 amNo, it is junk if it meets its specs. Because one look at the specs tells you "Danger, Will Robinson!". One single look, so I can't understand why people come up with that crap again and again. E.g. there is mentioning of a 100 V/div setting (10x probe) for a max. of 400 Vpp measurement (but he display allows to see 800 Vpp). So they imply you can do mains voltage and above with that thing. Now, where is the CAT rating? Bzzzzt, there isn't any.

author: BrickBoiler
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2011, 03:20:16 pm
content: Quote from: Alex on April 29, 2011, 12:58:01 pmDo you miss anything about the 190 series? I believe the 190's can do power measurements but that 120's can not? Power factor is something I would like to have.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 03, 2011, 03:46:03 pm
content: Hi, I wont suggest one is 'better' than the other, but one thing I will miss is the sampling rate of the 196B, 1G s/s compared with 20M s/s (max) for the 123 which is rather limiting, especially in electronics. Depends on your application.About PF, the 123 does not have this facility, but it does have phase angle. However, the 125 has PF and other handy 'power' measurements. The entire 190 series has PF measurement as standard. Unlike DMMs, you will need an external current probe to measure current for your PF measurements.Alex