buying oscilloscope, should i get lecroy 9354M? beginner question,

[akasaru]

Hello, should i buy a Lecroy 9354M for 150USD ?
 It is propably fully functioning, i thought about buying something more expensive, siglent sds1102cml including 2 probes, it's newer, but they go for 100 more than that lecroy.
 Is it worth it? Older oscope like that than new siglents and other?

[xrunner]

Hello, should i buy a Lecroy 9354M for 150USD ?
 It is propably (sic) fully functioning ...

If you don't know that it is working, but only "probably" working, I'd go ahead and say no, save your money for the Siglent scope.

Well there is the "no " answer, now somebody will come and say yes - that's how we roll here. 

[GigaJoe]

4ch , 500M , even such ancient cost a bit more if it fully functioned ,   my guess  "probably not"

[akasaru]

And even if it's fully working, as seller told me, deeper memory on siglent
and newer tech would be better than bigger bandwidth,  500kpts and older tech yes?
 Would it be such a difference between those two when used as my
first oscilloscope that i will learn on ?

[armandine2]

beginner, so what

you sound like a young person - no one particularly regrets a punt 

you may well regret not following your desires 

[EggertEnjoyer123]

Provided it works, $150 for a 500MHz scope is a good deal.

I have a similar scope at home. It’s pretty good. If you do analog stuff and you need the high bandwidth it is a good choice. If you don’t need the extra bandwidth then the Siglent is probably better since it has more memory

[Martin72]

Is it worth it? Older oscope like that than new siglents and other?

If I had enough space a few years ago, I'd take the old brand models over today's low-cost scopes any day.
We even still have three of the lecroy 93XX models at work, calibrated annually.
Yes, the memory may seem way too small these days, but oddly enough, hordes of developers in the 90s could still work with them.
So it can't have been that bad.
The M-variant stands for extended math function, furthermore these scopes offer multigrid display, probus interface and 50 ohm inputs, as well as other functions that are still not found in new scopes in the lower price range.
So all good ?
No...
The age gnaws of course, we had more than just the three previously mentioned.
The incremental encoders are due at some point, you must not forget that the screen is a tube, with corresponding burn marks.
And of course, new spare parts are no longer available.
Oh yes, and saving externally is an adventure with a floppy disk drive nowadays.
But there is the Scope Explorer software, with which you can control the scope via serial interface, as well as make screenshots.
So,
If you can do without the memory of today, if space is not a problem, and if you can get a model in good condition, you could get it for 150 bucks.

[nctnico]

A typical problem for the older Lecroy scopes is that they don't have peak detect so they will suffer from aliasing. This seriously affects the usefullness as a general purpose oscilloscope. Try measuring a relatively low frequency signal will narrow pulses and you'll soon find out why having peak detect is important.

[Martin72]

You with your special cases always...
We used these scopes daily in the lab and in development until the 2010s, with no problems.
Maybe we just didn't develop the right thing with them where that would have been noticeable.

[colorado.rob]

No. Hell, no.

That thing has a CRT. It weighs a ton and takes up way too much bench space. You bring your projects to it rather than bringing it to your projects. Or you have to get a cart to roll it around, taking up valuable lab space. No, no, no.

Get a modern LCD-based scope. Unless you really, absolutely need the bandwidth and cannot afford to spend the money on a scope that can be hacked to 500MHz... even then, no.

Let some poor, nostalgic TE addict add it to their ever-growing collection of useless and unused test equipment.

[nctnico]

You with your special cases always...
We used these scopes daily in the lab and in development until the 2010s, with no problems.
Maybe we just didn't develop the right thing with them where that would have been noticeable.

The latter is more likely. Try to measure vertical sync for a VGA signal for example... You don't know what signals you missed because they didn't end up on the screen.

One of my former employers had a later Lecroy model (compared to the model the OP is contemplating) sitting brand new on a shelve. Utterly useless for the stuff we developed because it didn't have peak detect. I think I powered it up once out of curiosity but I think it ended up in the bin unused. The HP Megazoom scopes where much more usefull and got used exclusively.

[alm]

A typical problem for the older Lecroy scopes is that they don't have peak detect so they will suffer from aliasing.

The 9350 series has peak detect.

Try measuring a relatively low frequency signal will narrow pulses and you'll soon find out why having peak detect is important.

I remember doing exactly that a while ago on a later Lecroy scope without peak detect, and the result was that as long as the scope can sample fast enough (based on max sampling rate, timebase and memory depth), it will show the pulse.

[Aldo22]

No. Hell, no.

That thing has a CRT. It weighs a ton and takes up way too much bench space. You bring your projects to it rather than bringing it to your projects. Or you have to get a cart to roll it around, taking up valuable lab space. No, no, no.

Exactly! This point should not be underestimated.
I have also considered buying a used CRO, but it would take up too much space in our apartment.

You can take this consideration of size and weight even further.
A very small, lightweight oscilloscope like the Zeeweii DSO1511G can be placed right next to the "DUT" and you can go through all the measurement points without having to lift your head and refocus your eyes to look at the screen.

This can be very convenient for certain purposes.

[DaneLaw]

As a single all-purpose scope for a beginner, get a modern one.
Makes little sense to gamble on an old one, that perhaps works  "okay" and where you would be a fish out of water trying to conclude issues upfront.
if it's your first scope, and it's intended as a learning tool to get your feet wet, get a basic modern one.

If you like fiddling with old things, and can troubleshoot & repair them, and you got an actual need for high bandwidth for relatively little buck, then these older boat anchors can make sense, but thats not the situation you express, quite the contrary...

[Electro Fan]

Long story short, you can't go wrong either way if the Lecroy is in good shape.

If you need 500MHz you can't do much better than $150 - if the scope is working and continues to work.

If you are primarily learning and don't have any particular use case in mind (in which case you are unlikely to need 500 MHz or maybe anything over ~100 MHz), then a modern digital scope might be more reliable (less prone to breaking or drifting out of spec) and the digital scope will make your learning curve easier in some respects (but not all).  There are lot more features that will make it easier on the digital scope to help you with measurements.

If you start with either scope, there is a chance you will wind up with a second scope.  If you buy the analog scope and you really enjoy it, there is a chance you will decide to purchase a digital scope - and vice versa, your 2nd scope might be an analog scope just to see what the enthusiasm for analog scopes is all about.

A new digital scope might cost 2-3x (or still more) than $150 so it somewhat depends on your budget.

If you go with the 9354M you will get 4 channels.  Lots of people here will tell you that you need or really should have 4 channels.  My personal opinion is that for most beginners 2 channels will keep you busy until you learn why you might need 4 channels, but it can't hurt and sometimes can help to have the extra 2 channels.  With a digital scope the extra 2 channels will cost somewhat more than 4 channels (not a lot, but more).

I think you could make a case that if the Lecroy is in really good condition the $150 is about as good as you are going to do for 500 MHz and 4 channels.  So if you start with that and you are still enthusiastic you can then add whatever the best entry digital 2 channel scope is at that point; or by then you might see a reason to pay more for something beyond an entry digital scope (for 4 channels and/or more bandwidth, or other features).

Either path is fine, but you should expect that if you REALLY enjoy using an oscilloscope your first oscilloscope won't be your last oscilloscope.  There is a saying around here that you haven't reached Par until you have 19 oscilloscopes.

As a person who started with an analog oscilloscope and now has 3 analog and one digital, if I could only have one I'd put all the funds from the four into one very good digital oscilloscope.  Having said that if I had done that from the start, I'd have missed a lot of learning and enjoyment from the 3 analog scopes.  I think this is slightly backward and for most people one good digital plus a sufficient analog would give you the capabilities and experience to cover 95% of all likely use cases.  FWIW, today I use the digital scope about 70% of the time, one of the analogs about 20% of the time, and the other two analogs about 5% each - and the digital is the lowest bandwidth of the bunch (but it's nice to have high bandwidth when you want/need it so adding the Lecroy to a two scope bench can make good sense, IMO.)

Bottom line: if you are pretty sure this will be your only oscilloscope get a digital scope.  If you are pretty sure you are going to end up with more you can't go wrong with either approach:  digital first or analog first.  If the Lecroy is for sure working properly and you have space for it and later for a second more compact digital oscilloscope, then it's perfectly fine to start with the Lecroy.

Let us know what you decide and how it goes.

[tggzzz]

Hello, should i buy a Lecroy 9354M for 150USD ?
 It is propably fully functioning, i thought about buying something more expensive, siglent sds1102cml including 2 probes, it's newer, but they go for 100 more than that lecroy.
 Is it worth it? Older oscope like that than new siglents and other?

For a beginner, any working scope is better than no scope.

Don't forget to factor in the cost of the probes necessary for whatever you are going to be doing with the scope.

Don't forget that a scope is just the beginning - you will need other equipment. Do leave sufficient money to buy the other equipment.

[Veteran68]

Either path is fine, but you should expect that if you REALLY enjoy using an oscilloscope your first oscilloscope won't be your last oscilloscope.  There is a saying around here that you haven't reached Par until you have 19 oscilloscopes.

Jeesh. I'm well past that number in DMMs, I hope the same bug doesn't bite me with scopes. I'm still in the low single digits!