Hanmatek DOS1104: Good budget osciloscope but frustrating at times
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 окт 2024
- Reviewing the Hanmatek 4 channel DOS1104 osciloscope.
Two channel version is the DOS1102
This is a good honest budget oscilloscope, but the user interface is awkward in various aspects, which I find frustrating.
Why do I keep coming back for this stuff? I have no idea what is going on here. I'm just a simple carpenter, but I like this guy.
@@UncleChester genius meets thrifty. how can you not be into it? and he seems happy.
This video might as well be in Chinese, I don't understand a single thing he said😂😂😂😂
@@harkbelial if you keep watching these type of videos, you'll eventually learn 'chinese'.
He's really good at explaining things! I'm just a dumb electrician but knowing electronics knowledge has really helped me out in my field.
Same.
Swap out the fan in your Rigol for a quiet one such as Noctua, Be Quiet or Artic etc. Job Done.
Lol... So make it even more expensive.😂
@@meeponinthbit3466Eh, it's like $15 for a new fan. A full size PC fan like a Noctua doesn't fit, it's just 50x15mm, but that's fixable. It's a 2-wire fan, though, so I just added a series resistor to mine.
I’d did change the fan on my rigol , night and day difference !
you are very good in convincing me buying a more expensive scope :D
Yeah all of the cheapies are somewhat lacking. If you can't trust your instruments then you've got nothing too. None of the cheapies can sample or store much. They're cheap.
I came to the comments to say the same thing! Rigol should be calling to set up a deal with you, Matthias! I have been wanting a 1202 for a while. Each of these videos convinces me that this is the right unit for my bench.
Twice the price but many times the number of samples, better grounding and a better interface ... sounds like the Rigol is the better deal.
Indeed, for 100 USD extra you have a Rigol and you can trust the measurements.
Long time sub! You always fill my head with curiosity and want to know more! Thank you
Nice review. I own the hanmatek 4channel and for my audio projects it's perfect. It has a very decent FFT which i use to calculate amplifier distortion.
I have the Siglent SDS800xHD, having switched from the Hantek DSO2D15. The Siglent is significantly better than the Hantek you truly get what you pay for. It’s definitely worth spending a bit more for a reputable brand.
Again, I'm glad I choose this Rigol a few years back above one of the cheaper options. Yes, it's more expensive, but as it is my first scope and I'm not very familiar with using them, it would be extremely confusing for me when a scope shows me strange flukes.
So I would say: ESPECIALLY for scope noobs, buy one that has an understandable and proven user interface and does not show weird stuff periodically
Best bang for buck
Thanks for the review, Matthias! 😊
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
My old Tektronix TDS 1002 (2 channel, 60 MHz, 1 GS/s) looks pretty good, even in monochrome. I think Tek did a good job on the single shot trigger. Good to know there are some inexpensive hobby level scopes available.
It is definitely worth saving up for a quality scope, IMHO. I personally prefer Siglent gear over Rigol. Siglent strikes a nice balance between cost and performance. Although, Uni-T has recently entered the market with some really intriguing offerings. If I were buying a new scope, I'd take a good look at Uni-T's new stuff.
Yeah, I used a Rigol at work and it was fine, but ended up spending more to buy myself a Siglent and I'm super happy I did. The Rigol just has some bad ergonomics that always drove me nuts when using it, whereas everything is where I expect it on the Siglent.
Particularly, the Rigol tries to save space by interleaving time domain and voltage domain controls on the panel, rather than keeping them clearly grouped in clean boxes on the Siglent.
The controls on my Rigol are awfully crowded compared to the fnirsi or Hanmatek, but its got the buttons I need.
@@matthiasrandomstuff2221 Certainly, I wasn't so much addressing that post to you. You obviously already know what you need or want from a scope. It was more addressed to viewers who may be looking at a first scope.
@@scottbez1 Weird you bring that up, I use Rigols a lot but own a Siglent and it has better specs but the UI layout is worse and makes no sense, like putting the multipurpose buttons under the screen not neyt to it. Rigols newer usbc bowered 800 900 scopes are crowded for sure, but not the older ones like the one in this vid.
Nice review mate! Rigol is still the top dog of cheap scopes!
Idk how trace buffers work in this sort of thing, but it's weird to think that manufacturers either can't or don't add a way of making it somehow expandable since a very large (~ millions) trace buffer seems to be so useful
That is normal on most scopes that "single trigger" is where you get all the samples. Also as soon as you dive into brushless motors is where you will appreciate 4 channel scope.
For comparison I have Siglent SDS1104X-E
and one advantage over rigol is that it has ultra fast Web Interface. But is around 100e more expensive than your rigol.
And still need single trigger to get all the 14M samples.
Thank you for such honest and practical reviews. Pure gold in todays world full of deceptions.
Also not to be confused with HamTek the leader in releasing the hickory-flavoured magic smoke!
I would not go cheaper than a Rigol, best bang for buck
Siglent also has a similar priced scope that's quite decent. That's what I have because I thought it was quite a bit more capability for not much more money. But both Siglent and Rigol are legit.
@@ccoder4953Rigol's 1054Z has a nice "free" upgrade for non professionals, a lot of value for the cost
@@ccoder4953 I agree, both are well known players.
Great review thanks!
As the song has it: "You don't know what you have got until its gone" in this case, you won't know until you have acquired multiple oscilloscopes added to your collection.
When I was in my early teens, and the only scopes were big heavy, and "inexpensive" ones only at places like hamfests, I would have been more than happy with the cheap on with the quirks. Also, it would be interesting to see if you hook the cheap scopes to a cleaner power supply like a mediocre bench supply. The signal may not improve, but they may go from ok to usable. Also, your inexpensive lab would have both a scope and a power supply.
Given these cheap scopes run off of a usb adapter and 5v power, I wonder how they would stack up against software usb scopes like the picoscope which is about the same price.
A Picoscope is considerably more expensive than these cheap scopes are. You can get a carrying case for about what one of the cheap scopes costs though.
You could use a real linear power supply for the 5 volt , even from batteries
@@buitenb You can filter the output of a SMPS good too. I like putting PI filters on them myself. I find those substantially reduce spurious noise that emanates out of lousy SMPS. Not perfect but a vast improvement. Component values aren't even critical. Just anything within a reasonable range does the trick. Theoretically there's ideal values to use. Anything works much better than nothing. Two caps and a coil.
I think you were charitable in that review, but they'd have to pay me to use it... What was the brand? Hammer time? LOL
I'm not going to play games like that example the UI resets after a single-shot capture. As you demonstrated, you need to make multiple attempts at capturing an event and fighting the UI to establish the trigger each time; What a headache! A tool that you have to go to all that trouble and fight to use will costs you more, especially a DSO with a ridiculous small amount of buffer memory.
I get we don't have a lot of money these days, and this is going to become a serious hobby with electronics, I'd advise someone it would be to save up and afford a better low-end scope, they cost in the ballpark of $1000 to, $1500. You might be find a refurbed model for cheap as well.
In 2022 I got a Brand new GW Instek GDS-1104b in that price range, not all will agree to that choice, so you find what you like, I don't need to have a uber-fancy Keysight scope to do the kind of work I do, it is a nice but cheap-ish 4 channel 100 MHz DSO lots of buffer decent capability, two things it does that are impressive: it does FFT and other math functions, and serial protocol analysis like I2C, SPI, etc. all INCLUDED, it was not a trial or add on for extra cost.
Does depend a little on what you need, saving up for a decent scope that can also run on a battery would be challenging it seems to me as few decent scope makers seem to consider that you may want a real o-scope while touching grass away from the nice safe electronics bench... There are some multimeter with a hint of scope blended in I'm aware of but still limited. Same applies to second hand too, very few of those would be trivial to run off a battery source the way this scope should be. So if that feature is of any use to you...
On the whole I agree the quality of the cheap tools in these areas just isn't good enough to be worth it, a cheap socket set is probably worth it for those moments you need to abuse a socket but cheap electronic or machine tools are usually too annoying to use, need lots of remedial work etc and thus not good value in the end compared to getting a good old one..
@@foldionepapyrus3441 well, yes we are agreeing completely, I did say in my comment that it depends on use, but a serious scope this is not.
For cheap scopes, a Chinese company, UNI-T makes great little scopes. I managed to get about 5 of them for some classes that I taught in Cal. State, and my experience in the education side of electronics is the frustration of a cheap instrument to a beginner, IMHO, it can be worse than no instrument at all. If you noticed how much he had to track down the noise and use the other scopes to verify the issues of the EMI due to lack of shielding and... well, I'm getting lost in the weeds here.
So, yes, back to your point, if you're not going into the profession like being a bench tech, or doing R&D, then, a cheap-o scope can be just fine. It seems like you have a good handle on what you're requirements and the limitations are acceptable.
@@raymitchell9736 Indeed, just pointing out the one thing 'special' about these cheap scopes is they are set up in a way its easy to make them just work on a battery, which is nearly impossible otherwise. So for a portable scope this one may just be the best possible choice...
Still prefer my Rigol DS1054Z, ok it's 348 euro vs the DOS1104 220 euro on aliexpress, but it has 12MB buffer (3MB if all 4 channels are used) and you can hack it to be 100MHz and still works around 200MHz, and enable all the features. It also has a network port that you can use to connect to a PC and control it remotely or through software. You can also download captures to your own software which you can use for further processing. The fnirsi and hanmatek seems to be toys in comparison. That small 10KB buffer is really a deal breaker. Controls are not the best compared to more expensive scopes but it does the job.
I've used 4 channels a lot debugging digital signals and some floppy drive analogue signals using read, index and 2 analogue signals at the same time. Or video signal with horizontal sync, vertical sync and video signals on separate channels.
I've also seen hacks that replace the fan with a quieter one, though I don't mind it that much.
Would be interesting how these compare to the Owon and Uni-T cheap 'scopes.
I haven’t used my early 1970’s Heathkit oscilloscope in many years..
feels like only a pro should buy low budget/off brand scopes for specific applications. they don't seem good for learning process unless you have a lot of guidance.
What....that makes no sense.
@@EnlightenedSavage I get what he is saying. If you are a beginner, you might not be able to solve or understand the little flaws of these cheap ones, so you might get lost. Learning on a good tool, is often makes learning a lot better and faster.
I was thinking exactly that. The things you do with a scope are complicated enough without the scope itself adding artifacts and distortions on top.
For learning electronics, you _definitely_ don't want to skimp on a good scope... Which is precisely what most hobbyist/beginners would do.
I've heard the same is true of telescopes, if you're getting into astronomy. A cheap one can be frustrating enough to kill all the joy from the process
@@Sonnell the main reason this is true is due to the information available. cheap knock off brands will inevitably have less documentation, therefore it's harder to learn.
someone new at a task will learn whatever they are told, so the exact process doesn't matter as long as it is documented. someone new would just think that is the norm, and would not question if it is a "flaw" to begin with.
I think this man needs to have a dinner date with Electroboom, and discuss scopes! ^_^
Mister EVBlog should join
I have to wonder what one of the big names would come up with if they tried to make a quiet / budget scope to supplement their other models. I don't know, but I suspect the Rigol is big and loud possibly because at the core it is a fairly old product and they probably don't want to spend R&D to update it.
Nice!
That's funny, I just filmed a video of building my electronics toolbox out, and will ask my viewers if there is a good cheap scope I can put on top.
All the cheap scopes have no sampling. It is an endemic problem with the lot of them. It's really the only spec you need to look at comparing DSOs. Because it's what's going to sting the hardest. When you over run the sample depth all they do is display a sine wave. Here's your waveform kiddo. See, it's some kind of a wave. Basically you can take the advertised bandwidth and divide it by 10. That's what it can really do. The rest is interpolation.
@@1pcfredYour comment makes no sense. You seem to mix up sampling memory depth, sampling frequency and bandwidth.
You need a bandwidth that cover the highest harmonic you want to see, to se a squarewave reasonable well you need about 10 times the bandwidth of the fundamental frequency. This has nothing to do with if the scope is cheap or not, it is basic electrical engineering.
@@larslindgren3846 good luck to you.
Seems like they're dancing as close to the "Hantek" trademark as possible.
For some crazy reason, the 2 channel version on Ali-Express is £4 more expensive than the 4 channel model. What gives?
Infinite oscilloscope glitch:
1 review scope
2 buy new scope from video revenue
3 goto 1
Undocumented features is an expression that was already coined when home computers came out. Thanks Mathias for revealing the secrets missing in the manual. There is a place for every instrument. We need a bigger workbench unless we can afford a flagship like the top of range Keysight.
No one spot that GUI is very identical to OWON scopes? Also keys and rotary encoders are the same. Looks like a low cost brand produced by OWON.
I wonder if they could modify the controls as you would want them with a firmware update?
Hanmatek? reminds me of the YTer Stephen He and his "off brand" comedy sketch series.
I want to ask what a scope like this is good for? But Im sure I wouldnt understand the answer
Analyzing complex waveforms..
What I dont get is that memory is so cheap these days, why do these scopes still have so low trace buffers
Did you add something to cover the on-off button on the toothbrush? The button on mine stopped working and I think its has to do with tooth paste / drool getting on it.
As a hobbyist, I'm happy with the FNIRSI. I don't do RF work, so that may be why. A scope costs less than a decent soldering station was an easy buy for me. Thanks for the tip on this Hanmatek. I'll recommend that one to my friends from now on. (Btw, with the reverse "N" I thought it was written in Cyrillic. If so it would probably pronounced something like "naimatek")
My soldering station cost $20. You can't get much oscilloscope for $20. I'd say my soldering station is pretty decent too. Being as I've bench soldered professionally and I do have a Weller WTCPN to compare it to. As far as Chinese company names go they have a Scrabble set and just toss the tiles and see what comes up. So it really doesn't matter how you say it.
Did you try using Ch1 and Ch4 to see if it dropped your samples by 4x?
so many features on electronics these days are easter eggs.
This single re-trigger is the most annoying feature of the low end Owon scopes, which this is the rebadge of.
The Fnrsi isn't great. I prefer the Xlkjd or the POIfwenlkn, unless you're doing high frequency stuff in which case the Zsldioje and the Qpsodif!!_(8dh are the best.
This looks like the Owon, is it a rebrand?
I'd just save up and buy the Rigol. Why buy something that's half as good. These are $160ish scopes. For $280 you can get a 2 channel 100Mhz Rigol.
1900 views in 2 hours, can't wait for the next scope review. LOL
Maybe, maybe not. I should try a Hantek.
You gotta love Chinese and their naming capabilities😂😂😂😂
makes me think Hantek has to be a pretty good brand considering that they are trying to sound similar to it!
@@matthiasrandomstuff2221 especially when they try to sound German with their branding, instant quality +30%
Just hold the wand from my fnirsi next to my hanmatak under my rigol.... Its like he is trying to speak to me, I know it.
In should’ve paid more attention to my electronics class. Dr Braba ruined my appreciation for this stuff. 😢 Matthias would’ve made it so interesting.
I keep watching these videos. Maybe if I knew what those things did I might understand it.
Chinese firecrackers. you get what you pay for.
sorry, just this oscilloscope (Fnirsi & Haиmatek, - look this, no name Hanmatek !, this name HaИmatek !!!) very-very bad, beeee 🤮
I'd stay away from this cheap stuff. The Keysight EDUX1052A is brilliant value at just $517 USD.
if you are willing to go at 3x the price...
Looking at you explaining that trigger thing alone would've been enough for me to not buy this thing. Sometimes I have to do a lot of single triggering when debugging something and that would just drive me crazy. And the user interface really shows the price as well. You'll get what you pay for. If you accept that I'm sure it'll do the job.
First!
FNRINSI is a POJ that lies about it's specs and abilities.
You are WAY better of spending 20% more and get a Hantek (not Hamatek),
which are cheap, and not perfect, but WAY WAY better than both scopes you showed,
including DEEP MEMORY as standard except of some of their older models.