I kind of hijacked the Review Summary video #703 with a discussion of the quality of probes supplied with the DS1054Z.
The original post I made with an image of an example of how the waveform appeared differently with the RP2200 probes that came with my DS1054Z as compared to the RP3300 probes that came with my DS1052E.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-703-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-review-summary/msg589804/#msg589804Both scopes were modified to 100MHz bandwidth. The image is linked below.
It was suggested that I needed to change the termination load, measure without the ground leads, maybe the ground lead length difference caused the appearance change, or maybe my signal was not good enough.....
Well I have measured with two scopes, all the available channels, with the cable from the function generator open ended alligator clips, 50 ohm load at the generator, at the end of a BNC terminated cable, with the spring clip ground point on the probes, directly into the function generator, and all the different arrangements that are possible. Yes the observed wave form changed, but there is always the same relative difference of the appearance of the wave form between the RP2200 and the RP3300.
I am either doing something wrong, or there is a visible degradation of the input bandwidth of the scope with the RP2200 model probes.
So two questions:
#1. Are my attempts futile and the apparent change in the displayed waveform is my lack of knowledge. This is a high probability.
#2. Does the performance of the RP2200 actually degrade the total system performance of the DS1054Z ?
Bonus question: If #2 is an affirmative, is this actually a smart move by Rigol to limit the system bandwidth of the scope so that the under sampling with 3 or 4 channels enabled is less of a problem?
Discussion?