Recommendation Request - NEW Rigol DS1054Z or USED Tektronix 2467BHD

[mtchastain]

Hi All!
I am in a quandary and I hope you can help enlighten me.

In the next month or so I will have enough funds for a scope purchase.  I don’t need anything particularly powerful and after a bunch of research, I believe a Rigol DS1054Z would work for me as it’s in my price range.
 
However, during my search I also found a used Tektronics 2467BHD (Analog - 400MHz) for sale that appears in good condition but has not been tested (but I have access to it and could test it on site). Last calibration was in the late 90’s from what I can remember, and it was listed at about 400.00 USD.

I have used Tektronics scopes in the past and was very impressed with the brand and the quality and so I am kind of torn now. I am willing to sacrifice the bells and whistles of a new digital scope if an older analog scope in this class is still viable.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Also, any ideas on the tests I should do to the used scope would be wonderful.

-Matt

[OldSchoolTechCorner]

As much as I love the Tektronix 2467 BHD, the Rigol DS1054Z is the best bang for the buck at that price.

[FlyingHacker]

The Tek is a much nicer instrument. It is like buying an older Mercedes va. a new Hyundai...

And just like that the Tek will likely take more maintenance. Typically the 2400 series scopes need new capacitors in their low voltage power supplies. This is pretty easy to do if you are decent with an iron, an ideally have a desoldering station (cheap Chinese one works fine). I did mine on a 2465. Sometimes there is damage to the boards from leaky caps, which can be easy or hard to cleanup, or repair (damaged traces). Mine had just two caps that had leaked, and cleanup was pretty easy.

The Rigol will give you more on screen displays and calculate things for you, like rise time, frequency, etc.

Personally, I use mainly analog scopes (2465 and a 2232, which is an analog hybrid DSO, whcich will behave as a purely analog scope, or a CRT based DSO). I have frequency counters for that purpose if I need a continuous update, or use the cursors on the scope of I just need a quick read.

So it is really a personal decision, a lot like the old Mercedes vs. Hyundai.

[OldSchoolTechCorner]

The Tek is a much nicer instrument. It is like buying an older Mercedes va. a new Hyundai...

And just like that the Tek will likely take more maintenance. Typically the 2400 series scopes need new capacitors in their low voltage power supplies. This is pretty easy to do if you are decent with an iron, an ideally have a desoldering station (cheap Chinese one works fine). I did mine on a 2465. Sometimes there is damage to the boards from leaky caps, which can be easy or hard to cleanup, or repair (damaged traces). Mine had just two caps that had leaked, and cleanup was pretty easy.

The Rigol will give you more on screen displays and calculate things for you, like rise time, frequency, etc.

Personally, I use mainly analog scopes (2465 and a 2232, which is an analog hybrid DSO, whcich will behave as a purely analog scope, or a CRT based DSO). I have frequency counters for that purpose if I need a continuous update, or use the cursors on the scope of I just need a quick read.

So it is really a personal decision, a lot like the old Mercedes vs. Hyundai.

The Tek 2467BHD is a great scope, consider one of the best analog scopes. Power supply will need to be rebuilt, as capacitor leak and high wattage resistors need to be changed out. It a personal favorite, but for someone starting in electronics get the DSO. 

[EEVblog]

Absolutely no contest, get the DS1054Z
An analog scope, no matter how good (and that Te is about about as good as it gets), is no match for a modern digital scope.
Digital scopes capture waveforms, that alone opens up a whole new world from analog scopes.

[EEVblog]

The Tek is a much nicer instrument. It is like buying an older Mercedes va. a new Hyundai...

No, it's nothing like that.
There is a huge fundamental difference between analog and digital scopes. One allows you to single shot capture waveforms, the other does not. One of them literally lets you work easily on any type of signal in any scenario, the other does not.
It's like comparing a car that only goes in a straight line and can't stop, to one that has steering and brakes.

[pickle9000]

The single button is what it's all about. I remember using my fist DSO the TDS-220, what a powerful tool compared to an analogue. If you have a choice a DSO is the smart one.

[coppice]

The Tek is a much nicer instrument. It is like buying an older Mercedes va. a new Hyundai...

No, it's nothing like that.
There is a huge fundamental difference between analog and digital scopes. One allows you to single shot capture waveforms, the other does not. One of them literally lets you work easily on any type of signal in any scenario, the other does not.
It's like comparing a car that only goes in a straight line and can't stop, to one that has steering and brakes.

What about a Tek that comes with a good old fashioned Polaroid scope camera? You could buy an awful lot of Polaroid film packs for the cost of an analogue storage tube. :-)

[EEVblog]

This 2467 is happy!
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Guaranteed-Tektronix-2467-4-channel-350-MHz-BrightEye-scope-Calibrated-NIST-/151876480197

[crispy_tofu]

Must have good working hours 

I would go with the DS1054Z.

[mtchastain]

The Tek is a much nicer instrument. It is like buying an older Mercedes va. a new Hyundai...

And just like that the Tek will likely take more maintenance. Typically the 2400 series scopes need new capacitors in their low voltage power supplies. This is pretty easy to do if you are decent with an iron, an ideally have a desoldering station (cheap Chinese one works fine). I did mine on a 2465. Sometimes there is damage to the boards from leaky caps, which can be easy or hard to cleanup, or repair (damaged traces). Mine had just two caps that had leaked, and cleanup was pretty easy.

The Rigol will give you more on screen displays and calculate things for you, like rise time, frequency, etc.

Personally, I use mainly analog scopes (2465 and a 2232, which is an analog hybrid DSO, whcich will behave as a purely analog scope, or a CRT based DSO). I have frequency counters for that purpose if I need a continuous update, or use the cursors on the scope of I just need a quick read.

So it is really a personal decision, a lot like the old Mercedes vs. Hyundai.

I like the car analogy, it kind of does feel like that especially when one has always owned Hyundais.

I think part of my reason for considering the used scope was that I go burned on a relatively cheap DSO a couple of years ago (not enough research on my part and a "too good to say no" price).

I would like to think that even a used scope of this class would be easier to trust to last at least another 5 to 10 years, though I now get the feeling I may be deluding myself.

I don’t think I would have any problems replacing most passive components if needed, but since here are a lot of other “not so easy to replace” parts, I still run a similar risk.

[EEVblog]

I like the car analogy, it kind of does feel like that especially when one has always owned Hyundais.

You don't get it, the car analogy is false.
Both of them are not cars that function the same. Both cannot get you from A to B.
To think it's about the quality is to miss the point.

I think part of my reason for considering the used scope was that I go burned on a relatively cheap DSO a couple of years ago (not enough research on my part and a "too good to say no" price).

I guarantee you will be bummed in few years if you get the analog scope and then figure out you can't capture a waveform with it!

I would like to think that even a used scope of this class would be easier to trust to last at least another 5 to 10 years, though I now get the feeling I may be deluding myself.

You are thinking about the wrong thing. You should be thinking about what the scope you are buying is capable of.
There are two types of scopes, those that can capture signals, and those that can't. The analog scope can't. The digital scope can, and do practically everything the analog scope can do.

[deadlylover]

I'd get the 1054Z, then camp out for a great deal on a 2467(or other analog scope) to satisfy your heart's desire. 

[mtchastain]

You don't get it, the car analogy is false.
Both of them are not cars that function the same. Both cannot get you from A to B.
To think it's about the quality is to miss the point.

Sorry, I do get what you are talking about. All the scopes I have ever owned did exactly what I wanted and expected from them, but I kinda wasted the extra functionality that came with the cheap DSO due to ignorance (only ever had one and it was very new to me).

After seeing the video on how they can really be used, did I start to understand what I was missing. I have to stop just thinking of scopes in an old-school analog way (old habits die hard).

You are thinking about the wrong thing. You should be thinking about what the scope you are buying is capable of.
There are two types of scopes, those that can capture signals, and those that can't. The analog scope can't. The digital scope can, and do practically everything the analog scope can do.

I think you are right…

Even if I can’t immediately use all the functionality of the DSO, I can at least learn to use it eventually rather than finding out I needed it and just not have it. I certainly don’t want to have to buy a second scope just to get something I could have had in the first place… Though a second higher bandwidth analog scope wouldn’t be a bad thing to have (that’s for the future)

[Howardlong]

No brainer, DS1054Z.

I had a similar quandary a few years back, I had a Tek TDS2024B and a 2465B, but had no room at the time and one of them had to go. It was the 2465B that went.

Later, once I had enough room, I bought a 2465B back again - and a 2467B for good measure. They are super scopes, but realistically, as others have said, single shot capability on its own trumps all the other benefits of the 2465B. Having both the TDS2024B and 2465B on the bench though, I'd almost always go for the 2465B first just because of its ease of use and responsiveness unless I needed single shot capabilities.

[EEVblog]

Even if I can’t immediately use all the functionality of the DSO, I can at least learn to use it eventually rather than finding out I needed it and just not have it.

You don't have to use all the functionality in a modern scope, but it's trivial to press the STOP button and have the waveform frozen on the screen for you to examine.
This alone will open a whole new world for you.

[TheSteve]

I don't even like Rigol but I still own a DS1054Z, as do many friends. I highly recommend it over the Tek scope.(and I love Tektronix!)

[Alex Nikitin]

I have both Tek 2465BCT and Agilent DSO3062A on my home bench, however the DSO is only used if I need it's specific abilities (to capture a single shot or a very slow process, to export a picture to my computer), for any live circuit work the analogue scope works much better for me due to the instantaneous beam response and WYSIWYG. That means I use the Tek 99% of the time. At work I have much fancier DSOs however it is a real pain if I have to work on a live HV/RF circuit with a DSO and I miss my Tek greatly. I may yet persuade my boss to get me a refurbished Tek 2465B/BCT  .

Cheers

Alex

[Fungus]

for any live circuit work the analogue scope works much better for me due to the instantaneous beam response and WYSIWYG.

If your DSO 'beam' isn't responding instantly then maybe you need to adjust a setting. The DS1054Z can grab 30,000 wavforms/sec if you let it.

[Solder_Junkie]

As most have said, the Rigol is the way to go. My own experience was 40+ years of analogue scopes as a servicing tech, I retired and "put up with" a dual beam 100 MHz Philips scope, it had a few minor faults (dirty switches, poor triggering, etc.) and then finally blew the power supply.

I had fancied a digital scope for some time but the early ones were pretty awful (at least in my price range). When the old scope failed, I bought a 1054Z based on Dave's video review and don't regret it at all. The saving in shelf space alone was worth it 

These days the scope is used for ham radio development and construction, the four channels are great to measure timing of control circuits, something that is tedious with a dual channel analogue scope and child's play with the 1054Z. I doubt the Rigol will last as long as the Philips did, but they are cheap enough and by then I probably won't care either.

[Howardlong]

I have both Tek 2465BCT and Agilent DSO3062A on my home bench, however the DSO is only used if I need it's specific abilities (to capture a single shot or a very slow process, to export a picture to my computer), for any live circuit work the analogue scope works much better for me due to the instantaneous beam response and WYSIWYG. That means I use the Tek 99% of the time. At work I have much fancier DSOs however it is a real pain if I have to work on a live HV/RF circuit with a DSO and I miss my Tek greatly. I may yet persuade my boss to get me a refurbished Tek 2465B/BCT  .

Who made the DSO3062A?It doesn't look very Agilent, is it an older rebadged Rigol? Id so I concur, I'd be reaching for the 2465B too.

[Alex Nikitin]

I have both Tek 2465BCT and Agilent DSO3062A on my home bench, however the DSO is only used if I need it's specific abilities (to capture a single shot or a very slow process, to export a picture to my computer), for any live circuit work the analogue scope works much better for me due to the instantaneous beam response and WYSIWYG. That means I use the Tek 99% of the time. At work I have much fancier DSOs however it is a real pain if I have to work on a live HV/RF circuit with a DSO and I miss my Tek greatly. I may yet persuade my boss to get me a refurbished Tek 2465B/BCT  .

Who made the DSO3062A?It doesn't look very Agilent, is it an older rebadged Rigol? Id so I concur, I'd be reaching for the 2465B too.

As I've said, I have some better DSOs at work - the Tek MSO2024 and Agilent DSO1014A and still I would prefer the 2465B. The Agilent scope at home is old but still adequate for it's capture capabilities when I need these, so I'm not upgrading it any time soon.

Cheers

Alex

[Wuerstchenhund]

As I've said, I have some better DSOs at work - the Tek MSO2024 and Agilent DSO1014A

Not sure I would call them better. The Agilent scope is very likely another rebadge of some Chinese scope.

[alsetalokin4017]

Anybody with a digital camera can capture a single-shot trace from an analog scope.

But no analog scope will do this:

[OldSchoolTechCorner]

I have both Tek 2465BCT and Agilent DSO3062A on my home bench, however the DSO is only used if I need it's specific abilities (to capture a single shot or a very slow process, to export a picture to my computer), for any live circuit work the analogue scope works much better for me due to the instantaneous beam response and WYSIWYG. That means I use the Tek 99% of the time. At work I have much fancier DSOs however it is a real pain if I have to work on a live HV/RF circuit with a DSO and I miss my Tek greatly. I may yet persuade my boss to get me a refurbished Tek 2465B/BCT  .

Who made the DSO3062A?It doesn't look very Agilent, is it an older rebadged Rigol? Id so I concur, I'd be reaching for the 2465B too.

As I've said, I have some better DSOs at work - the Tek MSO2024 and Agilent DSO1014A and still I would prefer the 2465B. The Agilent scope at home is old but still adequate for it's capture capabilities when I need these, so I'm not upgrading it any time soon.

Cheers

Alex

They are not a good DSO to based off of. The entry level Tek and Agilent are not that great, or competitive, huge gap in the market till you get to a decent one. Plus the FFT on most the Chinese scopes are not up to the task and only 10 kpts each channel and use interleaved analog-to-digital converters (ADCs), so poorer signal fidelity leads to more sampling errors. Some do it well, some don't. That Agilent DSO1014A is a modified Rigol 1000B, which is pretty dated technology. You want to get a Agilent X series 3000, or 4000 to get a reasonable scope, their budget lineup is not a good value, same with Tek.

For the price DS1054Z is a very good value.