Hantek 2D72 vs. OWON HD272S - Which Scopemeter is Better? 

You are welcome!

Great to hear!

What means x y mode?

Channel 1 controlling vertical trace, channel 2 controlling horisontal trace (no internal sweep).

You are welcome!

Glad it was helpful!

Thanks!

@@KerryWongBlog Hi, what do you think aborto XY option? Hantek or Owon what is better? Best Regards.

@@treadmillrepair754 Owon is a clear winner in XY mode.

Thanks!

Try to mail owon directly because of the update.

The reason that is ,is because they had to use different screens on the more recent ones.

@@eman59461 dumb Argument! You cook up different Firmware Version depending on serial number they know who has different TFT.. never leave old customers in the dust they won't buy again and advise against you :-) no update is not smart

Unfortunately, these scopes do not support math functions.

I received mine last week. The multimeter acquisition speed looks fine . Not sure that the capacitor function works OK. In addition, more languages are available. So far a great tool.

I am sure the firmware can be tweaked to make it better but the resistance measurement speed is largely dependent on the DMM chip used. On your other question, the single shot behavior is similar to all other DSOs. When you have both channel enabled, it will capture data from both channels when triggered from either of the channels. Hope it helps.

The users interfaces are quite comparable. Neither one is perfect and it does take some getting used to.

Thanks! Added the links if you wanted to check out.

@@KerryWongBlog Hi Sir, Owon looks better for me. Do you know if the Hantek have XY option? I want to buy one of this small scopes for use my curve tracer. Best Regards.

@@treadmillrepair754 Yes, I demonstrated that in this video, speed-wise OWON's XY mode is much faster compared to that of the Hantek.

@@KerryWongBlog Thanks so Much

The Owon standby current was a lot higher than the Hantek.....

What's the hardware version? Looks like it's an issue with an older hardware/firmware?

Купил его и теперь жалею. Иммитация осциллографа. Точность измерений примерно как у dso150.

Saludos, sabe si el Hantek puede salvar en el equipo (sin computador), para luego descargar? El manual no me deja claro. Estoy interesado y sigo pensando este como una mejor opción.

@@coordinaciondetecnologiaei8732 que tal, se puede salvar en el equipo la forma de onda, hace como una captura de pantalla, pero no guarda las valores de voltaje ni frecuencia ni nada, solo como para ver una captura de pantalla. De la forma de onda, no es bueno para eso, además bastante difícil de entrar a los menú para salvar y luego ver lo guardado, el Hantek no es bueno en ese función.

Higher consumption could mainly be due to larger screen and much faster processor.

hi, p.25 of the manual : "To observe the output of the waveform generator, connect the other end of the BNC cable to the signal input connector of the oscilloscope." => seems possible

Hantek has better dac models also. Faster rates, etc.

I would like to see Hantek offer a vhf/UHF Spectrum Analyzer with a tracking generator . Any such plans?

So after messing around a bit I found the USB-C cable work in one position, flip it over and it does not work. So it sounds like they did not wire the connector in right.

@@JerryBiehler 👍

I noticed that the HanteK retains settings after being powered off, and back on. That memory storage feature comes at some minor power occupation cost. I prefer the longer battery life when in use, as you never know how long troubleshooting may take.

BTW, you can edit waveforms via a CSV file (I showed that in one of my videos) with the Hantek.

@@KerryWongBlog you mean for the awg? Coul you provide a link? Thank you..... Still amazing how one tool enables this, another that, but both just part of the functionality desired....

@@82sledge If you go to the product page hantek.com/products/detail/13174 you will see a download section, the software download contains everything you need to control the 2D72.

@@KerryWongBlog Thank You Kerry, but I think there is some misunderstanding. I have this SW already installed and there are many posibilities how to export data to various formats. However, I haven't seen any option in the SW (in DEMo mode the AWG is not working), how you can upload your own data to the Hantek's generator, only drawing signal by mouse.... This is whai I was asking. And is sad that there is no protocol for Hantek to enable remote control as for Owon. However, for Owon you can control only SCOPE features and its PC app suports SCOPE/AWG modes only as well (probably using the same protocol), but still no way how to upload waveform to AWG even if you can access OWON as USB storage.... So even if they look so identical, they are actually very different almost in every function, UI approach etc....

@@82sledge Yes I pointed this out in my comparison video. For the OWON you can't upload your arbitrary waveform at all and it could be a deal breaker for folks need that functionality. For the 2D72 though you can design your waveforms using a CSV file. I demonstrated that in my review video for the 2D72.

Hantek's PC software is very comprehensive, everything you can control on the Oscilloscope you can control in software. Whereas for the OWON, the software is very limited. You can only use it as virtual scope, that's about it.

Thanks for the link. From what I see, the Hantek is a slower, than the Owon. But both have update-rates far below from USB Scopes. Maybe 1 or 2s per frame.

I know this comment is from 9 months ago, but if this is still something you're looking for an answer on, you can use either of these for automotive. I have the Owon, and I'll use it early on in a diagnostic, especially if I was already in that area to start with using the Owon as a multimeter. Or in a tight space under a "dog house" in a motorhome when I don't want to take out my Pico and a laptop. Regarding "bare minimum specs", it's not as easy as that, but as a reference point, a very common automotive specific scope that a lot of people use is the 4225A picoscope. Comparing the Owon at least against those specs ( not all of these will impact every type of, but worth noting ): Pico has a sampling rate of 400MS/s vs 250MS/s in the Owon. Pico has a 20MHz bandwidth, this Owon is higher, and the cheaper 40MHz Owon still has the same other stats, so you could go with the cheaper one. Pico has 12-bit resolution, I *think* Owon has 8-bit. You can look up what each attribute means to see if it would impact what you want to do. Beyond that, one of the huge differences you're going to deal with is what automotive specific software is going to do for you. Especially with the Pico. It will automatically convert things like mV to amps, and maybe the most important feature for someone who is just starting is the waveform library. Which on top of doing all the conversions can overlay/stack your known good on top, while looking at your live feed come in on the bottom ( or vice versa ) and see not only that you have a signal, but what yours looks like versus what it *should* look like. This won't matter as much over time as you get familiar with sensors, and what they should look like, but it's a huge benefit early on. One other note is regardless of the approach you take, and once you have an understanding of a scope is how to properly access the signals you're looking for. So if you're just doing this as a DIY with your one vehicle, see if you can find a PDF online or something with all the wiring diagrams for your generation. Otherwise, you may want to invest in something like ALLDATA, or something that may not only get access to your wiring diagrams, but also provide specific instructions on which wire is a signal wire, power, ground, etc, so that you're properly backprobing the correct wires. Lastly, Pico constantly maintains their software, and it's quite mature after all of these years. In summary, every tool has a purpose, so you can use this for automotive, but if you were going to spend $200 and only ever use it for automotive, and have a Windows laptop or maybe even a desktop on a cart, I think you would get better results out of the Pico, especially if you're not familiar with an oscilloscope yet. If you are familiar with an oscilloscope, don't mind having to do some conversions, like the idea of the multimeter/multiple purpose unit in a smaller footprint, and are going to work on things other than vehicles, then one of these units may be an easy choice. I ultimately went with the Owon, one of multiple reasons being the TrueRMS.

Don't believe what fnirsi "promises". Most of the specs they claim are complete lies. The 5012h pocket scope for example is utter crap. 100Mhz, 500Mega samples / sec my ass. Its 30Mhz, 125Msps at best.

@@simontay4851 It worth to add some money and buy some Hantek 2c43 or Owon.

Hi, I work fixing audio gear, FNIRSI scopes are totally useless for my job, minimun division per volt is 50mv in all models. Is imposible to find any background noise. Best Regards.

Completamente de acuerdo, el mínimo de 50mV/división en los Fnirsi 1013 y 1014, los limita mucho, y espero se den cuenta los diseñadores para resolver ese grave detalle. Actualmente estoy usando un Sigpeak 2512G, de 10mV/div y estoy encantado, me funciona mejor y más preciso que el Hantek 2D70, y tiene 128k de memoria de profundidad contra los 6k del Hantek o 10k del OWON. Completely agree, the minimum of 50mV/division in the Fnirsi 1013 and 1014 limits them a lot, and I hope the designers realize this serious detail. I am currently using a Sigpeak 2512G, 10mV/div and I am delighted, it works better and more precise than the Hantek 2D70, and it has 128k of depth memory against the 6k of the Hantek or 10k of the Owon

@@sergiogalpon Yo reparo audio High End y utilizo mi querido y primitivo Fluke 99b que tiene 1mv de sensibilidad mínima. Además tengo un Agilent de 150 mhz que funciona muy bien. Todos estos osciloscopios baratos sino es por un lado es por otro pero siempre tienen algún problema. Saludos.