Help to decide oscilloscope: Instek or Rigol

[MAXPAYNE]

I have narrowed down my selection to two oscilloscope -

Instek GDS-1102A-U and Rigol DS1102E,

http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1298

http://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds1000e/ds1102e/

which one will be convenient for doing SMPS related works ? pls suggest your opinion.
based on your opinion I will buy one of them ..

[Gallymimu]

I have a Rigol.  I don't know the Instek.  The DS1102E is the same as the Agilent equivalent.  I have been very happy with it.

It should be fine for SMPS work.  The only real consideration is bandwidth and you don't usually need a lot for SMPS.  The real issue with SMPS work is the probes.  Isolation, current measurement, latency between current and voltage channel, and being able to measure instantaneous power effectively would be my concerns for SMPS use.

There are also a bunch of threads about scopes here that talk about the Rigol and maybe the Instek.  You should check them out.

[FriskyFerretReloaded2]

Two buddies bought Rigol scopes after I recommended them. They're damn happy with the quality and function.

[optikon]

Another vote for Rigol here. I have one and know 10 others who do as well. All smiles, no regrets.

@Gallymimu Last time I was scoping a noisy SMPS, I found that there was significant energy into the 100's of MHz so I partially disagree with your statement about needing low bandwidth. I think a 500MHz is just right for most high efficiency designs these days that have ringing during switch cycles. Nasty things they are..

[MAXPAYNE]

Here I have done a comparative analysis of these two models...

Plus point for Instek one is that it has 2M memory which is very useful for detailed zoomed view of a waveform, for which I want to go for instek. Down side is the max input voltage is only 300V whereas rigol one has 400V ...

Posted on: February 12, 2013, 12:12:55 pm - Automerged
If I go for Rigol, then I should go for the 1052E  model and hack it to make 100MHz  (1102E). This will definitely save some bucks ...

[bbarney]

you really think saving $49 is worth the risk of screwing up a scope if something goes wrong with your hack

[Gallymimu]

you really think saving $49 is worth the risk of screwing up a scope if something goes wrong with your hack

I've actually got one of the 50MHz models modified to 100MHz.  It's only a software change (as of a year ago).  So there isn't much more risk than you have when update firmware.

If you are in business then yes saving $50 isn't worth the time, effort or risk, but as a hobbyist or a student $50 might make a big different.

[zac]

You may want to consider a USB interface scope that uses your PC for a display.  I much prefer the larger PC display and navigating with a mouse, especially when looking through a long capture.  

Rigol offered this model, but it's discontinued.  The caveat is the display is slightly distorted with windows 7 and Rigol has no plans to fix it:

http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-VS5062D.html

I picked up one of these agilent scopes from ebay for about $500 in new condition.  It has 32 megasample memory depth and up to 1 GSa/s on a single channel:  

http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-1368543-pn-U2702A/usb-modular-oscilloscope-200-mhz?&cc=US&lc=eng

One other thought.  If you work on circuits with high voltages, a floating/isolated portable scope is handy.  I have an old fluke 105B:

http://www.atecorp.com/products/fluke/105b.aspx

Even the newer version of this only has 4K memory depth though.  

[thunderer]

For SMPS you'd need an isolated one. A 1:1 transformer would do the job for a small amount of money.

[card_claud]

I have two friends that bought  Rigol recently and so far they are very happy with it.

[Delillusions]

Hi!
Well if you want to choose from those two, then I suggest Rigol.
Personally I would choose a Tektronix. An older 100MHz Tek can be cheaper, and almost as good as a new 100MHz Digital Scope. But this is just my personal opinion.

[frnando]

I bought a DS1052E about 2 years ago, and with moderate to low usage I already had to change the time base rotary encoder. Besides this, it has good hardware and an easy to use software.

It has the long sample memory (1M) feature too (although it reduces the sample rate by a rate of 1/2)

[Vineyards]

I have been using a Rigol DS1062CD since 2007. It is pretty well-made. Since I haven't used a higher spec oscilloscope, I don't know what I am missing. However, it is good value considering the amount I paid on it.

When it comes to measurement equipment the choice of brand does make a difference mostly in the way you trust your measurements. If you are doing it with a Fluke DMM, calibrator or with a Tektronix scope you know you can rely on the values you obtain. It is not that other brands are useless but reliability and stability are the reasons why people invest big bucks on the big brand. At the end of the day, there are a couple of US, one or two French and a few Japanese and German top brands with which you can't go wrong.

Rigol is excellent for practical purposes but "Would you use it in a crucial project?" is another question

[LithiumOverdosE]

I used both Rigol oscilloscopes and spectrum analysers. I never noticed any obvious problems, although some of their functions were buried down in the menus. It was a bit awkward running through all of them, with one hand using probes and with the other frantically skipping through menus. 

However, for that price they offer surprising specs and quality, which is often au pair with brand names like Tektronix (in the same category, of course).

I have used some of Instek equipment in the past (not the scopes) and it worked as advertised. Certainly not top of the range but quite decent equipment for the price.

That said, Rigol scopes struck me as more mature products than Instek ones.

[johnri]

I have just bought the Rigol DS1052E, based on my usage so far I think
it is good enough for hobby/semi professional use.

I have no desire to hack it to DS1102E (yet) since it serves all my needs
at the moment, although I might try it once it is out of its warranty period
of three years.

I am satisfied with the build quality also, quite unlike some other China
made test gear (multimeters) that I had bought earlier.

[OrciBorg]

I have a RIGOL DS1052E 50MHz models modified to 100MHz.

It was very good and cost benefit as well.

[bigtoy]

This is a pretty old thread, still it's interesting and probably useful because this question seems to come up a lot.

Most of the votes in this thread seem to be for Rigol. I use an Instek scope at work and it's fine; no problems at all. A big reason for buying it was the deep memory depth, which is useful when looking at serial data streams (eg I2C, SPI, etc). But I've nothing against Rigol - I use a Rigol multimeter and signal generator. They are both OK (not great, but OK).

[sarah90]

The rigol ds2000 series offer a lot for its money. Including hacking the entry level ds2072 to the high end 200MHz model. Not clear for me if you should wait for the ds2072a model. This is the new range, that goes up to 300MHz for about the same price as the non A models. However it is not clear if they can be hacked in the same way. Rumours go that it will be the same hardware as the the newer hardware revisions (v2) of the existing ds2000 models.

[dennis78]

You loking for low price scope, but I prefer great old brand Tektronix. Most people says TEK is too expensive, bad function/price, but who works with TEK and cheap scopes know why I like...  I will always chose used TEK instead cheap new scopes. It's my opinion.
Work with high bandwith require very expensive probes, maybe expensive than your future scope... Think about it.
Big internal memory -> mostly useles. I want to know who is ever success analyse some SPI, I2C,... in details with scope? For it, you have very cheap and good logic analysers. And for other purposes big internal memory isn't very important, because 1Mb >>4kb , but again not enough for many things.
Many cheap scopes hasn't good performance analog part, but you see it after some time using.

[MisterX]

I supposed the guy have already made is choice but did you consider Owon for a cheap oscilloscope ? I have a SDS7102V model and from now on I'm not deceived by it. It have an 8 inches color display, an USB output an can come with a battery. I can't compare with others cause I don't have them but I'm sure the quality is as good as Rigol and Instek and the price also.
http://www.owon.com.hk/products_info.asp?ParentID=57&SortID=66&ProID=172#sthash.jUdtUMqc.dpbs

[dikris]

don't buy instek. I bought two instruments from them (a spectrum analyser and an expensive RLC meter) and am very disappointed by the performance. These guys are simply not good

[Old_but_Alive]

I have an OWON  SDS7102V and for the price, am very happy.

 a large display, and the battery option is superb

[Vineyards]

When I have the budget I always buy a premium brand. There is simply no competition between big brands and cheap brands. There is a reason why they come with higher price tags. For example, I have recently bought a Fluke 289 and I find it to be heads and shoulders ahead of any 100-200$ product I have used.

[zac]

When I have the budget I always buy a premium brand. There is simply no competition between big brands and cheap brands. There is a reason why they come with higher price tags. For example, I have recently bought a Fluke 289 and I find it to be heads and shoulders ahead of any 100-200$ product I have used.

I have a fluke 289 and an 867B.  The 289 is great except that it takes about 5 seconds to boot up.  The bootup time took me a while to get used to.  The 867B (discontinued but available on ebay) has most of the 289 accuracy/functionality and includes a 5 ms/s oscilloscope which can be handy. 

[kayvee]

The 289 battery life sucks big time, for something as expensive as it is.

FWIW the Rigol is far superior it the Instek IMO, relatively speaking of course.