10 ms·
For sure - if you can afford them, get both. I was just surprised because I expected to use the SA a lot more when I got it. But I am mostly either testing fi
by cadr 3y ago
For sure - if you can afford them, get both. I was just surprised because I expected to use the SA a lot more when I got it. But I am mostly either testing filters are designing antennas, and the NA is the way to go.
- 2178393217 3y ago[flagged]
- GeorgeTirebiter 3y agoI have only NanoVNAs, up to the 6 GHz one ( https://nanorfe.com/vna6000.html https://nanorfe.com/vna6000.html ). But the TinySA at the frequencies of interest seems about the same? I guess what I'm asking: What features of the NanoVNA make it the "way to go"? FOR ME: It's the PC SW that allows a big-screen, which converts the fundamental "R+jX" measurement into many different views. https://nanovna.com/?page_id=90 https://nanovna.com/?page_id=90 Awesome.
- cadr 3y agoWell, they are different tools for different situations. I found, for what I do, having a vector network analyzer was more useful that having a spectrum analyzer. Specifically, measuring the SWR of antennas and measuring the resonance frequency of filters.