EEVblog #249 - Agilent U1272A Multimeter Review  - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: ModernRonin
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 12:30:14 pm
content: US$370? For a meter? **Really?**Don't think I need to remind anyone here that you can get a whole scope for that.I understand that if you're a pro EE and this meter is something you're going to keep and use for decades, the cost may be worth it. And with the cal certificate, if you're in a business where you need to have proof of cal, maybe then also.But for most people and most purposes? I think this is the "more money than brains" club! Guess I shouldn't be too surprised, since most Agilent gear is...

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 04:05:06 pm
content: Dave commented on the switch protruding such that when it fell on its face it would hit the switch knob, If like me the leads once plugged in are left in, they will stop the switch hitting the floor first and as that is most likely way that it does fall, your testing something and pull the probe leads. I cannot see that it is a big an issue and having a higher profile to the switch eases use when wearing gloves which are not just worn out side but in cold-stores and clean rooms.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 04:52:53 pm
content: You're also paying for the reliability and toughness expected of an industrial meter, and is a reason such meters cost more.For toughness, the 1272a is equal to the 28II in terms of IP rating while the 87V is a DMM proven tough except when there is a risk of submersion in water or penetration from fine sand, like in the desert. All 3 have have similar shock and vibration ratings for surviving drops and bumpy rides.Reliability requires a history of knowing it survives harsh locations its taken too, and reads true afterwards. Accelerated testing can help, but real field exposure is a better test. The 87V is part of a series designed ~1989, and many meters so made are still like new today, and in calibration: it was built to last and take a level of abuse. The 1272a has to live up to this legacy, as its its main competition.

author: sacherjj
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 05:56:09 pm
content: With tools that you know you will use for a long time. Buy once, cry once. That being said, I'm using a very decent BK Precision Multimeter that was vastly lower than the Fluke or Agilent price levels.

author: Rutger
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 06:50:49 pm
content: With a rebate of $ 100 the cost is now down to $ 270, that is quite a good price for this quality meter, here the link for the rebate:http://www.home.agilent.com/agilent/editorial.jspx?cc=US&lc=eng&ckey=2060152&id=2060152&cmpid=zzfindhhcashbackValid to 30th. April, 2012 (Only for Canada, though, I just found out).I am in a really split between buying this meter or a brand new 87V, what should I do??Rutger

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 07:30:16 pm
content: The Fluke at Amazon is $325, the Agilent is cheaper and you get more features, but do you need all those features over proven reliability? IMHO Agilent hasn't proven itself to be as bullet proof as a Fluke but it looks very promising. During the tests we did last year, we found all those horrid bugs, and now V2.0 is far better, but what if another bug happens if you are on an aircraft carrier, or working on aircrafts, nuclear power station? But if you're not doing such work, such meters are overkill, there is no need for that kind of robustness, then I'd go with the Agilent.Some service photos aboard USN ships, you decide what type of DMMs these are:http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Navy_100520-N-8913A-096_Interior_Communications_Electricians_3rd_Class_Rory_J._Shisler,_left,_and_Larry_O._Hughes_perform_maintenance_on_the_internal_phone_system_aboard_USS_George_H.W._Bush_%28CVN_77%29.jpghttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Navy_091004-N-8960W-014_Interior_Communications_Electrician_3rd_Class_Karla_Martinez_inspects_wiring_aboard_the_aircraft_carrier_USS_Nimitz_%28CVN_68%29.jpghttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Navy_100308-N-4997L-001_Electrician%27s_Mate_2nd_Class_Corey_Hartley_checks_voltage_with_a_multi-meter_aboard_the_aircraft_carrier_USS_Abraham_Lincoln_%28CVN_72%29.jpgF16 maintenance, what could be in that yellow holster?

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 07:38:18 pm
content: Quote from: Rutger on February 29, 2012, 06:50:49 pmOnly in Canada though...

author: Rutger
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 07:51:42 pm
content: Oh, yes I didn't see that 'little' detail, I guess that make the choice a little easier...I think this a bit misleading, they don't put this detail on the main page.PS: I have just send the Agilent Rebate department an email asking them to extend the rebate program and include other countries as well.Who knows if they respond, but if they are a smart company this would be the right time to market this product.I mentioned the review Dave did and maybe they will follow my suggestions, I would recommend other people to do the same thing if they want to buy this product. Here is the email for the Agilent rebate deparment: hhcashback@agilent.comRutger

author: Rutger
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 29, 2012, 08:14:55 pm
content: Quote from: saturation on February 29, 2012, 07:30:16 pmThey look like Flukes, but are they a 'special' edition of the 87 or are they a different model?They don't seem to have all the buttons?Thanks, Rutger

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 04:04:01 am
content: Quote from: Rutger on February 29, 2012, 06:50:49 pmDon't forget that you can get the U1272A as a freebie if you buy an Agilent E36XX series power supply (not really that expensive; start at about $400):https://www.eevblog.com/forum/buysellwanted/test-equity-sale-for-an-e3600-agilent-basic-bench-powersupply-with-multimeter/msg89044/#msg89044

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 04:07:42 am
content: Quote from: Rutger on February 29, 2012, 08:14:55 pmThey're not all 87's, but they're all Flukes. I see some 17X or 70 series in the bunch.The point is that for some critical users, the expected reliability of Fluke makes them the choice, rather than features/price.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 04:38:10 am
content: Quote from: ModernRonin on February 29, 2012, 12:30:14 pmYou are buying a professional meter from the worlds biggest T&M company.The Fluke is (was) more expensive, so I do wonder how it became the worlds most popular selling multimeter?Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 04:39:31 am
content: Quote from: saturation on February 29, 2012, 04:52:53 pmNo it's not, not even close.The Fluke 28 is IP68, the U1272A is IP54, there is a massive difference.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 04:42:50 am
content: Quote from: Rutger on February 29, 2012, 06:50:49 pmUnless you lust after a Fluke, or want it for a specific reason (lifetime warranty, spares, proven etc), then get the U1272A, better bang-per-buck.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 04:46:17 am
content: Quote from: Rutger on February 29, 2012, 08:14:55 pmThey are the 170 series Flukes. Very tough reliable meters designed for electrical work. Tougher than an 80 series, but not as tough as the 28IIThe 80 series was designed for "electronics" use, not really field electrical stuff like that shown.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 04:51:48 am
content: Quote from: grenert on March 01, 2012, 04:04:01 am$400 for both?Bargain.You could even resell the PSU on ebay and get the U1272A cheap!Dave.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 01:48:29 pm
content: You're right Dave, my bad. For clarification, the 87V is officially IP 30.Great review as always, given several other reviews for the same meter in the past year, its again very clear you do the best ones. Not stroking your ego, but its hard to beat such continuous consistency, akin to Fluke's reputation in DMM.@genert: yes, my point exactly.Just checking the website, Agilent seems to have raised the list price by $7, its now $377, likewise the Amazon price for the Fluke 87V, inflation with gas prices no doubt.Quote from: EEVblog on March 01, 2012, 04:39:31 am

author: Rutger
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 05:28:33 pm
content: Quote from: grenert on March 01, 2012, 04:04:01 amWhere have you seen the PSU for $ 400, the lowest price I have seen is $ 461.

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 05:56:46 pm
content: Sorry, that's the "about" $400. The best published price I've seen is starting at $441:http://www.hensleytech.com/DC-Power-Supplies?order=sell_price&sort=asc&title=agilentMany places can do better than the published price if you ask for a quote.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 10:15:38 pm
content: Quote from: saturation on March 01, 2012, 01:48:29 pmThanks.I'm actually thinking of having a proper check-list for reviews, so I don't forget anything, and to give every review as a consistent feel as possible.With this one I was at home editing and then realised I forgot a few important tests, so had to go back shoot the scenes later that night.I need to do one for different types of instruments, multimeters, LCR meters, scopes etc.I might also help keep the times down, if I limit myself to X seconds/minutes for each point on the checklist.Dave.

author: Vredstein
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2012, 10:51:50 pm
content: "I might also help keep the times down, if I limit myself to X seconds/minutes for each point on the checklist."This would adversely affect the character of your reviews. It's the "off-the-cuff" aspect that was the initial appeal for so many, and that same approach is what keeps people coming back.If a certain point on the checklist inspires you to elaborate, so be it.Intentionally leaving flaws in is a show of respect and submission to the gods.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 02, 2012, 12:55:25 am
content: Quote from: Vredstein on March 01, 2012, 10:51:50 pmOh, for sure, I'd still elaborate where appropriate. But some sort of formal checklist might help stop adding unnecessary mumble to the points that should be quick and sharp, thus leaving room for the points that need longer commentary. e.g. does it light up white LED on diode range should only be a 10 second clip, as per the current video.Dave.

author: ToddFun
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2012, 05:50:16 pm
content: I posted this on the blog comment but I thought I would add it to this thread too:Dave,I noticed you touched on the smoothing mode and when you did it didn’t look like it was working AT ALL! I found this video by a guy in South Africa that ran a compare between the Same Agilent and 87v for just smoothing feature and it was clear the Agilent U1272A was not working. Maybe another bug in the software?Todd

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 03, 2012, 06:21:58 pm
content: Quote from: ToddFun on March 03, 2012, 05:50:16 pmYou can't really tell if or how the smoothing is working by looking at the display since the human eye can't follow the numbers that fast. You would have to plot a graph of the measurement and look at the peak to peak range and maximum rate of change to see the effect of any smoothing.Now of course from a human point of view it may be that smoothing is a useless feature and what we need is display damping. But that's a different thing.Also the smoothing may be more visibly effective with a less crazily changing input signal. If the input signal was only fluctuating mildly the smoothing algorithm might iron it out a lot better.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 04, 2012, 06:00:06 am
content: Quote from: ModernRonin on February 29, 2012, 12:30:14 pmwon't be much of a scope for 370$ ... maybe a toybox machine with 4k deep memory and barely 20Mhz ... or an old analog clunker.It ain't worth the label 'scope' unless it does 1 Gs/s realtime ( not equivalent time. that is just nonsense ) and has at least a meg of memory at full throttle, and pull 7 effective bits out of their a/d . Lower spec machines can, at best, give you an indication of what you are looking at. But you can not use those to make accurate measurements. Oh, and don;t foregt soe real quality probes. A good scope probe can easily cost 200 or more $ .Keep your eyes peeld on fleabay... once in a while something zooms by and you have to strike fast. It is better to hold off and save some more money and buy a scope that will last you for a long time.It all depends on what you do with it. if you only use a scope once a year: fine go with the 300$ one .if you use a scope almost daily : it pays to save some money and buy a decent machine.If your business is hardware development : pull out the big guns

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 04, 2012, 07:13:49 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on March 04, 2012, 06:00:06 amErr, you've been able to get the DS1052E for under that for quite a long time now.A decent and very usable entry level scope by any measure.Dave.

author: Rake
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 05, 2012, 05:36:31 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 01, 2012, 04:42:50 amIf you do fieldwork (and make a living at it) buy a high end Fluke... FLUKE has never let me down. (it's a lot of money at the start but it is WELL worth the money!) If you want to beta-test a meter then buy the U1272A.... (I don't like to beta test equipment in the field) Heck even the mid range Fluke 179 is more meter then what most folks need for field use.....And it works no questions asked.And yes my Meter is Fluke.. I'm not a fan boy just a field tech that likes meters that work.... hard hat photo to followKirk

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 05, 2012, 12:50:02 pm
content: Quote from: Rake on March 05, 2012, 05:36:31 amI'd be inclined to agree with that.Unless you need the fancy features in the field, a dead simple reliable Fluke 170 series is a better bet.Dave.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 05, 2012, 01:01:52 pm
content: A pic would be nice. I've seen from very battered Fluke series DMMs in the hands of electricians, HVAC and cable technicians. The way they treat it, trust it and it does still work, is hard to beat.Quote from: Rake on March 05, 2012, 05:36:31 am

author: billclay
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2012, 04:46:32 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 01, 2012, 10:15:38 pmI think the checklist is a great idea! I'm often testing a meter as you do and would like a checklist of items to verify. Would love to seeit posted in the forum.Oh, and maybe you can create a table (on the wiki?) for each meter you test so we can have a reference to look at and compare!

author: thilo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2012, 09:50:46 pm
content: Was the capacitance range in spec when they did the calibration?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 08, 2012, 01:27:53 am
content: Quote from: thilo on March 07, 2012, 09:50:46 pmNo cap readings at all on the cal certificate!Dave.

author: ToddFun
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 08, 2012, 07:46:19 pm
content: Look Ma! No wires.http://www.techni-tool.com/431TE177Agilent IR To Bluetooth Adapter

author: billclay
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 09, 2012, 07:11:30 pm
content: At around 22:19 in the video, you said you “disabled the null”, but I still see the “delta” symbol in the display for the next few tests. Your offset was about +28pF at the initial null.

author: seraphim
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 20, 2013, 08:50:48 pm
content: Hi Dave,I believe that you were measuring capacitance with Agilent Multimeter wrong. The LCR meter is charging up the cap, and after that you measure it with multimeter. Maybe that residual charge is causing error in measurements. You can also notice that even Agilent LCR meter was a bit off when you brought out another LCR and started measuring first with it and only then with Agilent LCR. You continued talking and didn’t notice the Agilent LCR meter’s error and how it slowly was recovering.