Tektronix 465 vs 2236 Scope - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / beginners

author: thakidd
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 02:53:07 am
content: Hi EEVblog! I watched Dave's buy a analog scope plz video and decided to do that instead of jumping into a DSO right away.I have found to possibilities that I am considering.First up is the Tektronix 465 scope. It appears that it cost around $110-120. It comes with 2 new 100MHz 10x probes and has been professionally calibrated.Next up is the Tektronix 2236 scope. It will cost $180. It has supposedly been used by an electronics specialist and is said to work perfectly. It comes with 2 new 10x 250MHz probes and has the integrated DVM frequency/timer included.Both are used. I plan to use this scope with Arduino and the Make Controller development along with other micro stuff. This will be my first scope so I would like to get something reasonable which will keep me busy for a while before moving DSO.What do you think?

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 06:07:57 am
content: Both are excellent scopes, and those look like pretty good deals. Assuming the 2236 is in good shape that's probably the one I'd go with, though some might disagree. The quick and easy parameter readout is easy to get used to and easy to miss, and would be worth more to me than a fresh calibration assuming it was at least close.If you're going to be working primarily with micros as opposed to lots of analog stuff I'd have to say it might be worth saving up for a Rigol or Instek. Analog scopes are great to learn on and have their own useful niche, but the lack of single shot capability is a real drawback for a lot of digital work. I picked up a 465B on craigslist a while back as a first scope, and I can honestly say that while I've learned a lot I'd have a much more comprehensive tool if I'd have saved for the Rigol. If money's not really a problem then go for it, nothing wrong with having an analog and a digital scope!Hope that helps.

author: allanw
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 06:24:42 am
content: I'd get the 2236. It's a better scope in every way. I have one and I love it, but then again, I dont have experience with the 4xx series. The 2xxx series might be slightly more difficult to service.The counter is handy if you don't have a dedicated unit for that.edit: Although, consider what DJPhil said. A DSO might just be a better investment for the future...

author: thakidd
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 06:30:07 am
content: Hrm...I think I am with both of you on investing with the future as my primary goals surround micros and repairing digital type stuff.One question though...If I go with the Rigol DS1052E in Dave's videos, is it still hackable?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 06:31:17 am
content: I'd get the 2236, it's a much more modern scope, so stands a better chance of surviving much longer.For micro work though you'll find a DSO much more useful. But of course it's more than double the price.But a nice analog scope will never go to waste in the lab.Dave.

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 06:41:58 am
content: Quote from: thakidd on September 24, 2010, 06:30:07 amAs far as is known, yes, but no guarantees! As new firmware makes it's way out into the world there may come a day where it's actually fixed. The most recent available for sale require downgrading the firmware to perform the hack, after which it's re-updated or left as is. Even without the hack it's still a respectable scope for the money.Seethis threadfor details.

author: thakidd
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 06:49:24 am
content: Fair enough...I will take my chances...Just bought it! Will report back.Still may pick up that 2236 though

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 07:57:50 am
content: Quote from: allanw on September 24, 2010, 06:24:42 amThese statements seem contradictory to me.The 465 is older, but was build better / more expensive. The 465 probably has a better chance of surviving a drop (not that I'd recommend it) and will have a higher quality feel (not everyone that used the older series likes the 22xx series for this reason). The 2236 is newer, has more features, but feels cheaper. I'd expect fewer problems with the 2236 because it's newer, probably less issues with dirty pots/switches or caps. Everything equal, I would also prefer the 2236.I would also consider the condition, seller, the amount of information the seller provides, any warranty, if I can pick it up locally / test it, if it includes a manual (though PDF versions can be easily acquired from places likeBAMA), if the probes are real Tek or cheap commodity probes and if shipped, how likely it is for the seller to pack well enough for it to arrive undamaged (not that trivial, since the front panel knobs are fairly fragile).Professionally calibrated can mean anything from 'I took 30s to compensate the probes' to a fully traceable factory calibration, depending on seller. As long as it works fine, I don't consider calibration that important, since an analog scope is not a precision instrument anyway.Re DSO, that has been discussed several times. If you can afford an acceptable quality DSO (like Rigol/Instek) now, it's a good choice (more useful for digital work), but otherwise, an analog scope will be very useful, even after you acquired a DSO (especially the cheap ones that don't offer features like persistence or high update rate of those costing thousands of dollars).

author: Ernie Milko
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2010, 08:33:03 am
content: I've got experience of both types.I would go for a 465, but look for a 465B(later model)Top-notch quality, the 4XX series.I'm not overly impressed with the build quality of the 22XX series.