Not odd but my mistake, I took a picture on both 'scopes and the Fluke gave marginally better results, the text referred to the wrong one. Sorry for the confusion.
On 2 Feb 2012, at 16:43, David wrote: > Odd. Did Tektronix mark it Fluke PM3082? :) > > It is nice to know that the current generation of digital cameras can > be used for this application. It is too bad that the image has so > much noise. > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2012 16:27:03 +0000, John Howell <j...@howell61.f9.co.uk> > wrote: > >> ........and here's another photo of the pulse from one of the newer breed of >> FE-5680A that require the 5V. >> Taken with a Sony Cybershot H5, 8 sec exposure, 'scope is an elderly >> Tektronix 2252 >> >> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1690159/1PPS_1%20FE-5680E.jpg >> >> On 2 Feb 2012, at 15:50, Alberto di Bene wrote: >> >>> I managed to take a photo at the scope screen showing the 1 pps pulse >>> from an old FE-5680A (the one that does not need the 5V and does not >>> output the oscillator signal - just the 1pps). >>> >>> Exposure was 30 sec, F9. The signal was barely visible with naked eye, >>> and some jittering is present. The room of course was in complete >>> darkness, but the reflex of the stand-by led of another instrument >>> can be seen... >>> >>> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15089947/1pps.gif _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.