I think the TLS216 is very good, but the active probes are expensive to
replace, when and if they need it. And I believe there are two channels
that act as oscilloscopes and they are limited in input voltage. But I
can't say this for sure because it's been a while since I've used one.
In my opinion, you'd be better served with the TDS224. It's smaller,
light weight, very portable (about the size of a lunchbox), and as scopes
go, relative inexpensive. I use several of the TDS200 series nearly
every day, and I wouldn't know what to do without them.
Bottom line from my perspective is don't sepnd the money on the TLS216.
Get the TDS224 instead. I think you'll be happy, and won't regret it.
Hope this helps you out.
Regards,
Jim
{Quote hidden}> While looking around for a digital oscilloscope, I found a Tektronix
> TLS 216 Logic Scope on eBay. By the looks of it, it's a 16 channel
> digital oscilloscope (not unlike the TDS 1000/2000 series?) combined
> with the capabilities of a logic analyzer. It's on the very-high-end of
> my budget but I wouldn't mind spending so much if it will serve me well
> and last for some time.
>
> A few questions:
>
> Is this unsuitable for a serious electronics student/hobbyist?
> Could it be used as an oscilloscope? Is it a viable replacement?
> Would I be better off with a regular 2/4 channel scope?
> If so, would a new scope be better than a used scope in the same price
> range? (ie. TDS 1002 vs. TDS 224)
>
> I'm also looking at a Tektronix TDS 224 (4 channel) on eBay -- I have
> read good things about the 200 series in general so that would
> definitely be my second choice. Any ideas on what I can expect to pay
> for this?
>
> I'd really like to make the right decision when spending this much but
> I find it hard to research specific oscilloscope models as most search
> queries are flooded with test equipment resellers' pages and generic
> descriptions. I am open to any suggestions.
>
> Thanks / James
>
>
> (I've already got an analog HP 1740A, but it's not in the best
> condition, takes up way too much precious workbench space and I can't
> capture the waveforms without photographing it)
>
> --