No love for the Rigol DM3058E DMM ? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: netdudeuk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2015, 09:46:45 pm
content: Unlike a couple of their budget scopes and the DSA815, I don't think there's been much written online about this. Any obvious reason why not ?

author: Muxr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2015, 11:23:02 pm
content: Few reasons.Your Agilent, Tek, LeCroy scopes have a pretty poor selection in the hobbyist entry level territory. And a scope is a much more essential piece of lab gear than a bench DMM. Not many people need the resolution and accuracy of a benchtop DMM. And a hobbyist typically isn't going to use GPIB automation either. So it's a specialty piece of gear more suited for professional use.Also you can pickup a used 5 1/2 DMM fairly cheaply which is not really a case for DSOs. Today's Rigol entry level DSO's are better than old DSOs even those few leagues above.If you're buying a bench DMM it makes little sense to get anything other than your usual Keysights, Keithleys or Flukes. And if you're buying for professional use you'd probably want more resolution than 5 1/2 DMM from a company that has a track record of making solid DMMs.

author: netdudeuk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2015, 06:44:59 am
content: I had a look at those brands (with bench type in mind ) on RS and found that even for 5.5 digits, you're talking 25% more for the Keysight and way more than that for a Fluke. And as for the KeithleysSo, for the average enthusiast, that Rigol still doesn't look so bad.

author: Muxr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2015, 07:08:24 am
content: Must be the Dollar being strong, because here in the US (amazon prices):- Rigol DM3058E: $469.00+ $11.49 shipping- Keithley 2110-240: $622 (free shipping)- Keysight is more expensive, U3402A: $828 + 3.99 shipping, they don't really have an entry level 5 1/2, but you can get a 6 1/2 for $1,097.00.- Fluke 8808A: $738.00But if you're looking for a bench meter at the entry level prices, might as well get used. You can get Keithley 2000 for less than $300.http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=keithley%202000&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc&_trksid=p2045573.m1684

author: con-f-use
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 04, 2015, 07:12:49 am
content: I bought a DM3068 for roughly halve the list price. It was a bargain and works really well. I like it.Had I been spending about the list price, I'd rather have opted for the Agilent 34461A since the software is just so much better.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 05, 2015, 02:27:43 am
content: Another reason to re-consider buying DM3058 or DM3068 is that the only place to get them calibrated is by Rigol. There seems to be no authorized labs who have been given the procedure to do the calibration.

author: netdudeuk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2015, 10:28:11 am
content: How about the B&K Precision models 2831E ?http://www.farnell.com/datasheets/1858092.pdfKEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES U3401A ?http://www.farnell.com/datasheets/1864167.pdf

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2015, 07:55:16 pm
content: I've been looking into the DM3058E for a while.It seems to be very well regarded - one of those products that has made Rigol the top Chinese test instrument mfr.If it does what you need and is in your price range, I'd say go for it.Pros and cons vs others:* Vs. the BK.: I think Rigol has a better reputation than BK. BK isn't considered bad, but just middling. Rigol seems to have a better reputation, but that's just my sense from doing a lot of reading.* Vs. the Keysight; Keysight is the "safe" choice. You know it'll do what they say, and it'll be well built. But you'll pay more - that reputation is worth money, they charge for it.* Vs used meters: The Rigol has a lot more features (because it's modern) including USB and RS-232 output, and a recent calibration. A used meter with the same specs will be cheaper, maybe come from a more prestigious mfr (but not necessarily any better quality in reality), but won't have all the nice modern features. (If you care.)* Vs. Siglent SDM3055: Rigol's unit seems to have a great reputation. Siglent's is still TBD - no real reviews and very little feedback so far. (It might be great, who knows.) Looking at the user's manual, the software looks a bit immature (could use some polish) and the UI looks more complicated than the Rigol's. But the Siglent has that beautiful color LCD display, with graphs and everything. So there's that.* Vs. Keysight 34461A - for 2.5x the price you get a modern meter with the nice LCD (like Siglent) and from a first-rate reputation mfr (no question about that). But it's 2.5x more $$.The only real con I see with the Rigol is that it's an old design (been out for about 8 years) so likely it'll get replaced soon with something newer. (Just speculation on my part based on what Rigol's done with their other products.)I'd guess we'll eventually see something with similar specs to the current one but a color LCD display, like on the Siglent SDM3055 and Keysight 34461A.But "soon" could be 3 years from now. Or next week.If I were buying a $500 meter, I'd get the Rigol, I think it's the best value for money. But your priorities may differ.

author: smgvbest
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 06:32:36 am
content: Quote from: Lightages on June 05, 2015, 02:27:43 amCan not speak for other countries however in the USA you can use these facilities for calibration the DM3058/3068 and other Rigol Equipment.- Excalibur Engineering in Southern California- Norway Labs in Beaverton, Oregon- Broadview Instrumentation Services in Ohio

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 06:46:14 am
content: Oh, so Rigol is not giving out this information. Good to now that the procedure is getting out. Now I might consider a Rigol bench meter.

author: krish2487
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 06:58:01 am
content: I think hugoneous here has a rigol 3058 and did a review of it...

author: netdudeuk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 11:46:43 am
content: I think that it was the next model up. Great review with some interesting experiments.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 11:55:05 am
content: Quote from: Dave92F1 on July 03, 2015, 07:55:16 pmThat's because the Keysight is 6.5 digit (even better with new firmware). It's a different class instrument.Fairer to compare the Keysight 34450ASo only 1.7x price.The 34460A is only 2.0xQuoteFor only $500, yes I'd buy the Rigol too.

author: John Coloccia
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 12:21:02 pm
content: Quote from: Dave92F1 on July 03, 2015, 07:55:16 pmOh, I wouldn't say that. BK Precision products fall into the "just work" group. Rigol's the one that can't seem to get out of it's own way with questionable software. Specifically, the BK DMMS are a bit old fashioned, but I would expect to be able to put one into service today, and have it perform flawlessly for a long long long time.

author: Macbeth
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 12:45:25 pm
content: I love my DM3058E. Great value for a brand new 5.5 digit meter. Excellent documented SCPI protocol over USB/RS232, no need to pay the extra for GPIB. This is no "empty lunchbox" like the other Chinese pretend bench meters Vichy or UNI-T's.Howerver, owning the DM3058E hasn't stopped me recently getting my new toy, a used Keithley 2015 as they are a bit of a bargain right now.

author: Macbeth
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 01:09:01 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on July 04, 2015, 06:46:14 amThe calibration guide is freely availableon the Rigol website here....now I just need anebay Fluke 5520A... or perhaps just pay the lab down the road £45.

author: PA4TIM
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 01:34:24 pm
content: If you need a 6,5 digit meter, you often want all those digits to be as close to the real value as posibleYou want a meter you can trust and one that will be within those specs for a very long time. That is, I want that. And that is why I bought a new Keithley 2000. It has all the things I find important and most important, it is still spot on. Besides that I have a 196 and a 199. And they were are calibrated when I got them and are still within specs. I have a Prema and a Solartron 7,5 digit meter.If you just want a benchmeter with more digits to show a relative change in what you are measuring. Or you want lots of other functions so it can replace a hand multimeter. And you want flashy colors in a cool looking housing. Then a Rigol or unit-t or other Chinese can be something for you. For most things good enough and more digits as you need. Most users of crap DMM's are happy and do not care much about specs (and often do not know the meanin of the specs) and some of them could be in for a bench dmm that is also as cheap. And why not, some need 8,5 digits, for others a multimeter with 10 leds (1 per volt) is more then enoughNow I'm going to hide before the Rigol fanboys and the bang-for-bucks posse hunts me down

author: Macbeth
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 01:57:00 pm
content: Quote from: PA4TIM on July 04, 2015, 01:34:24 pmBut he wants a 5.5 digit meter, though I'm sure accuracy is just as important.QuoteNEW? Blimey, I just checked the price of a newKeithley 2015$4500Yeah, used is for me. $300 is what I paid.If I wanted 6.5 digits Icouldget a Rigol DM3068 for $840, or as I have a new Rigol DM3058E for $470 and a used Keithley 6.5 digit and have two great bench meters and change leftover

author: AutomationGuy
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 03:15:54 pm
content: This is my favorite bench top DMM:http://www.hameg.com/717.0.html?&L=0I don't see often Hameg here so I just wanted some critics about it.Its a 5 3/4 Digit and I expect a high precision.You can get it for abouts 750€.I will probably buy it.

author: PA4TIM
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 04:17:14 pm
content: A Keitley 2015 is not a 2000 and it is not a normal multimeter. Read the specsOr do you try to proof my statementQuoteMy 2000 was around 900 euro a few years ago. But I repair measurement and calibration gear for a living.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 05:37:13 pm
content: Quote from: Macbeth on July 04, 2015, 01:09:01 pmThats funny, nobody seemed to able to find anything before, and Rigol themselves said the meter had to be sent back to them. It is good to see them changing the policy, or good that you found it!

author: VintageNut
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 07:03:47 pm
content: Quote from: PA4TIM on July 04, 2015, 04:17:14 pmWhat specs in particular do you find different between the 2000 and 2015? The 2000 and 2015 are identical for measuring on the 10V range. The 2015 is missing the scan card capability and has the distortion measurement circuitry in that space. For basic DMM measurements, they are the same.

author: Macbeth
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 07:09:45 pm
content: Quote from: PA4TIM on July 04, 2015, 04:17:14 pmBut the 2015 is a 2000 with a THD measurement daughter board in the empty space of the 2000 optional scanner board. Dave's teardown shows the main board to be the exact same as a 2000.However, intrigued that you know something, I did just go and double check the specs. Everything exactly the same... But wait - right at the bottom of the DC specs sheet it states that the rear connections have a different t/c uncertainty on the high resistance ranges. For 10M and 100M it is 95ppm/900ppm for the 2000, and 70ppm/385ppm for the 2015.Either this is just errata or the 2015 is superior than the 2000 in this respect. Thanks for letting me know!(Did you actually read the specs and know what they mean?)

author: PA4TIM
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2015, 07:58:58 pm
content: Your missing the point. I do not care even a bit about what the 2015 has in common with the 2000 or what it not has in common. (I know both meters and I can read specs)I have the 2000, it costed around 900, and can be a candidate for someone wanted a 6,5 digit meter instead of a Rigol. I was not even talking about price. I wanted a Keitley because its good reputation and specs. And Rigol does not have that reputation. And that was my point. And you are allowed to tell that a 2015 is so expensive but why then quote me ? I did not mention the 2015 THD meterI would never buy the 2015. It is much more expensive and the extra things that make it more expensive I will never use.

author: kandrey89
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2017, 11:42:30 pm
content: Actually for sensitive automated photodiode measurements in the range of 100nA-1mA DM3058e from the specs appears to be the best solution.I compared against Keithley, Tektronix, Fluke, Agilent DMMs and the cheapest and lowest DC current resolution was in this Rigol DM3058e. All other DMMs had min range starting from 10mA which meant even if they did have 6.5 digits, they'd only get 10nA resolution, but a 5.5 digit with 200uA range gets 1 nA resolution.

author: Macbeth
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2017, 02:11:15 am
content: Hmm... is there some way I can use this to measure the actual input impedance of my Keithley 2000's?