Hey Dave - the MCL measurement (measured cable loss) at the bottom of the screen is very useful for monitoring your cable. Use the TDR to see how long your cable is, then sweep it to see what the MCL is and then compare against the pulished tables for that coax.
Watched your video on the Mini1300 and I am going to buy one. I was on the fence trying to decided NanoVNA or Mini1300 but this was enough to help me decide. Thanks for the great video and your hard work to present all the facts in a simple but REAL video and not just spouting some specs off a sheet.
Hey Dave, thx again for a very helpful video. I've been tickling around with the nanovna and find it cumbersome especially in the field. This seems to me a far better alternative. I'll order one today. 73 de ON3STG.
Hi Dave I have one of these and noticed that in the Frequency Sweep the VSWR screen has M1 M2 and M3 on the right. I assume these are Markers where you can move the dotted vert line to point of interest and store to M1 M2 or M3, however no stored markers shown on the screen and no mention in the rather skimpy manual. Any ideas ?
It also helps to invest in a stylus. The one with the robber tip. I have one and it works great. Touching the screen then having big fingers and missed touching the buttons LO. L.
Hey, don't blame Linux for the nanoVNA interface. I've been a Linux/UNIX admin since the 1990s and I still think the nanoVNA is a pain in the neck to use.
Good review, Dave. Thank you. I have the mini nanoVNA that I purchased on Amazon for about 50 bucks 3 years ago and it has served me well for the limited needs I have, but holy cow, this little box is really very nice. I can definitely see why it is 150 bucks more. I think I would use my VNA a lot more often if I had this one! 😅
@@BronxCowboy I received my adapter and so do I just screw on my coax going to my antenna. And then after adjusting put the coax back on my radio?I'm using this for a Stryker 497hpc in my 18 wheeler. Overkill I know but I'll be adding a home base soon and might as well just do it right
Hi Dave . Did you calibrate the 1300 before doing the test? Also, you changed the frequencies and didn't recalibrate. I read on another forum for Vna, and they said that a calibration is required every frequency changed ? Cheers Kev
Mine arrived today. Dave, more videos on this thing pls! There really isn't much content here on YT. I'm already having a blast exploring my unit. K0ATV
Just watch the device. The device has very sharp edges. I'm gonna open mine up and basil down the sharp edges. I just thought I was sure that information 73
You should understand that calibration of the NanoVNA (setting a particular frequency range, etc) is not the same as calibrating the Mini 1300. Its a shame that Dave did not show calibration for the Mini 1300. You do not have to calibrate the Mini 1300 every time you change frequency range. You should calibrate it once the first time you use it in a day, and then forget about it while you select as many different functions and frequency ranges as you want. I agree that having to calibrate the Nano VNA for each frequency range is cumbersome, and that is one of the reasons I prefer the Mini 1300.
@@notsure7874 I dislike people who comment when they don't know what they are talking about (besides the silly over-reaction of dismissing a device because you don't like the shape of the USB port). Go and watch the video again. You will see that Dave says there are two USB ports, one of which is used for charging. That is correct. You have *assumed* that the charging port is not USB-C, and complained about it twice now. You are wrong. The Mini 1300 is charged via a USB-C port. Think before writing.
@@notsure7874 Unlike you, I am not making any assumptions nor do I need to justify my posts by making up thoughts in other people's heads. I'm simply sitting here with a Mini 1300, posting factual information so that other people don't get wrong ideas. If you want to embark on an unjustified rant, then you do that. Best of luck to you.
@@notsure7874 I don't see this as a big issue because I spent $10 on a couple of USB-multi charge cables, so from the same USB power sources (power bank, car, solar panels, laptops - all have the same USB connector and provide power) I can charge my iPhone (lightning connector), iPad/NanoVNA/Mini1300/etc (USB-C) and various other devices that use Micro-USB. That way not only can I meet my own power needs, I can help others that I might encounter. My experience of being out in the field (mostly emcomm and SAR, but some SOTA&POTA) is that it is important to be adaptable.
@@notsure7874 Actually I do all of my HF operating portable, and I carry my Mini 1300 because it is extremely useful for setting up antennas in the field. For example the audio tone SWR function is great for adjusting dipoles. I think your suggestion that there is a material weight difference between a USB-C cable and a multi USB cable is ridiculous. The weight difference between a Mini 1300 and a NanoVNA is quite significant - my NanoVNA weighs 153g and my Mini 1300 weighs 372g, more than twice as much. You say in another comment that you just purchased a Mini 1300, it seems strange that you care so deeply about the negligible weight difference between a USB-C cable and a multi USB cable (enough to write five replies about the same thing) yet you're not worried about purchasing a *much* *heavier* antenna analyzer. Strange that.
Have you used the VNA much at higher (>290MHz) frequencies, such as sweeping filters? I love my Mini 1300 and it does great things for me, but the VNA simply doesn't work above 290Mhz. (That being one of the clock frequencies in the unit, I think they use harmonics to reach higher freqs).
the price on your amazon link show 218$ + 37$ shipping to canada.. a nanoVNA here is around 100$ca and do the same (just not have the same screen presentation and both S1/S2 are sma)..
It is not correct that "NanoVNA does just the same" - looks like you didn't pay attention to the video. I have both the Mini 1300 and NanoVNA and greatly prefer the Mini 1300 because it does so much more, although on my unit the VNA capability does not work well on higher frequencies. Even with that limitation the Mini 1300 is much more useful to me.
@@danielayers sorry but for the price, i'm with nanoVNA (which have an useful software compatible OS and PC, with averaging, many graphs for each mesure and print the results).. if you have some difficulties with higher frequencies, do a calibration in this area.. a calibration is the key for precision..
@@MarcusPocus Whichever you prefer is up to you, but most of your reasoning is based on incorrect information. (Have you used a Mini 1300 much?) It is true the Mini 1300 costs more, but there are reasons for that. Much better screen for a start. Far easier to use - you don't have to recalibrate it every time you change frequency range. The Mini 1300 can perform a wider range of functions and output a wider range of information/graphs. With the latest firmware (free download if not already installed) the Mini 1300 supports two different protocols for interfacing with a PC, one of which is the same as the NanoVNA so you can use a Mini 1300 with the same PC software the NanoVNA uses. And regards you comment about calibration, you have misunderstood my comment to mean that I don't know how to use/calibrate the device - which is not the case.
I'm confused why the data transfer is via the usb-c port, but they have a separate tophat style mini usb from 2002 to supply power, as if the usb-c port can't do both like it does with the nanovna. I'll buy one when they figure out charging that's not obsolete by more than a decade.
This is a silly comment, and wrong. The Mini 1300 (which I own) charges via the USB-C port. And if the shape of a USB port is what you would use to judge an entire device, then I find that very silly indeed.
@@danielayers Well then I guess the only source I could find that went over that, had it backwards then? What's the tophat one for then? Don't answer, because I don't care - if it's for computer control, or firmware updates I'm NOT doing that on the top of a mountain so it's irrelevant. I have everything I need - in the workshop which is where anything like that would happen. It's not a silly comment when you consider the use case. What's silly is not considering any other use case than what's in your head. I'm not carrying a giant box of obscure charging cables out into the back country up a mountain. I have a kit, and it's standardized around usb-c for charging. There are reasons for this. Nothing I own has micro, much less tophat. I have a charging bank and roll up solar panel which is the only means of charging it I'll have for days at a time. If it does charge via the c port, it would fit my use case. The (half in chinese) manual I found for it seems to say you're right, and the review I saw on it was wrong. So sue me. Jerk.
It’s based on an STM Discovery board… An evaluation board with the STM microcontroller and display so you can play with it, and decide if you want to use STM micros in your product. The Mini600/Mini1300 devices are the discovery board with an added RF board, battery, and a charge controller, all in a case. The charge controller uses the extra USB port for charging. The discovery board itself was intended to be powered any number of ways. Also, your comment is stupid.
@@BrekMartin I don't care what it's based on. Or what I can hack it to do if I had the desire to mod it. I care what it does. I wouldn't care so much if it used antiquated junk IF the use case were "in and around a radio shack". But that's not my use case. I'm not carrying 100 adapters in my kit. I'm carrying USB-C because that's what everything else uses. I've just kept on using my nanovna, and saved the 200 bucks. If you can't think outside of your own personal narrow use case, perhaps it is not my comment which is stupid.
@@notsure7874It’s a lot heavier than the likes of a NanoVNA. That might discourage me from favouring it over the NanoVNA. Part of that weight is its much larger battery. In either case, you wouldn’t be charging either device on the top of a mountain unless your day’s efforts are all about impedance matching antennas, and not doing any actual radio hobby. No, it’s you. Your comment brings to light an extremely rigid and obtuse attitude, and is stupid.
Hey Dave - the MCL measurement (measured cable loss) at the bottom of the screen is very useful for monitoring your cable. Use the TDR to see how long your cable is, then sweep it to see what the MCL is and then compare against the pulished tables for that coax.
YAY! I've been waiting for this. On the strength of your first mention, I already got it, and now I can get the real "skinny".
Watched your video on the Mini1300 and I am going to buy one. I was on the fence trying to decided NanoVNA or Mini1300 but this was enough to help me decide. Thanks for the great video and your hard work to present all the facts in a simple but REAL video and not just spouting some specs off a sheet.
Hey Dave, thx again for a very helpful video. I've been tickling around with the nanovna and find it cumbersome especially in the field. This seems to me a far better alternative. I'll order one today. 73 de ON3STG.
Can you please tell me if this will also tune cavali duplexers as well. ?
Great review, thanks for buying and trying. 👍👍
Does it come with a stylus? Would be helpful for guys like me with sausage fingers
Dave it says it covers all bands but I did not see 11 meters on there…So will it do 11 meters ? American cb band?
It will
Can it be used to check the notch filtering of a flatpack duplexer? If so a video on how to set up would be nice...
Thank you Dave. Very useful review.
Thank you for the video! Im going to buy one thanks to you. 😊
Hi Dave I have one of these and noticed that in the Frequency Sweep the VSWR screen has M1 M2 and M3 on the right. I assume these are Markers where you can move the dotted vert line to point of interest and store to M1 M2 or M3, however no stored markers shown on the screen and no mention in the rather skimpy manual. Any ideas ?
Another great video Dave... many thanks, much appreciated...
Hi Dave, is there an original Mini 1300 and where can you buy it?
NIce job, what is the latest firmware version now Dave?
It also helps to invest in a stylus. The one with the robber tip. I have one and it works great. Touching the screen then having big fingers and missed touching the buttons LO. L.
Can radio be used while this is connected ?
Preciso calibrar todas as vezes que for usar?
My 50 Ohm plug is actualy 52.45 ohms, How much of difference if any does this make?
None.. most antennas aren’t exactly 50 ohm and all most all radios have a tolerance of about 5-8 ohm tolerance + -
Hola Dave, donde puedo conseguir el ultimo firmware del mini 1300, el Softwaer para usarlo en la PC , desde ya agradecido , 73 cordiales
Hey, don't blame Linux for the nanoVNA interface. I've been a Linux/UNIX admin since the 1990s and I still think the nanoVNA is a pain in the neck to use.
Really need some help got kit but I don't know which is 5 or 50 open is obvious.
For calibration test .
Figured it out . Open cap should be easy.
1 with insulator is 50
Cap with out insulator is short .
Been long time since I played with electric junk .
I returned my nano vna. I could not figure it out after too much time spent
Good review, Dave. Thank you. I have the mini nanoVNA that I purchased on Amazon for about 50 bucks 3 years ago and it has served me well for the limited needs I have, but holy cow, this little box is really very nice. I can definitely see why it is 150 bucks more. I think I would use my VNA a lot more often if I had this one! 😅
Very confused. Received my mini 1300 today but my coax does not fit the test port. Am I missing something here?
You need the SO239 adapter
@@BronxCowboy I received my adapter and so do I just screw on my coax going to my antenna. And then after adjusting put the coax back on my radio?I'm using this for a Stryker 497hpc in my 18 wheeler. Overkill I know but I'll be adding a home base soon and might as well just do it right
The adapter goes between your coax and the mini1300. Remember to calibrate the 1300 before use.
@@BronxCowboy right I got that part. I can't tell which dummy load is which to calibrate correctly
Hi Dave . Did you calibrate the 1300 before doing the test? Also, you changed the frequencies and didn't recalibrate. I read on another forum for Vna, and they said that a calibration is required every frequency changed ? Cheers Kev
Very well done! I am a happy man.
There is a version with an even bigger screen and it's not that expensive.
what is the model name
@@zeel4550The Non-Existo-bigger-screeno.
Mine arrived today. Dave, more videos on this thing pls! There really isn't much content here on YT. I'm already having a blast exploring my unit. K0ATV
Just watch the device. The device has very sharp edges. I'm gonna open mine up and basil down the sharp edges. I just thought I was sure that information 73
I dislike calibrating the SAA V2 nano vna each time I need to use it. Wonder how accurate this mini 1300 is without running the calibration process?
You should understand that calibration of the NanoVNA (setting a particular frequency range, etc) is not the same as calibrating the Mini 1300. Its a shame that Dave did not show calibration for the Mini 1300. You do not have to calibrate the Mini 1300 every time you change frequency range. You should calibrate it once the first time you use it in a day, and then forget about it while you select as many different functions and frequency ranges as you want. I agree that having to calibrate the Nano VNA for each frequency range is cumbersome, and that is one of the reasons I prefer the Mini 1300.
@@notsure7874 I dislike people who comment when they don't know what they are talking about (besides the silly over-reaction of dismissing a device because you don't like the shape of the USB port). Go and watch the video again. You will see that Dave says there are two USB ports, one of which is used for charging. That is correct. You have *assumed* that the charging port is not USB-C, and complained about it twice now. You are wrong. The Mini 1300 is charged via a USB-C port. Think before writing.
@@notsure7874 Unlike you, I am not making any assumptions nor do I need to justify my posts by making up thoughts in other people's heads. I'm simply sitting here with a Mini 1300, posting factual information so that other people don't get wrong ideas. If you want to embark on an unjustified rant, then you do that. Best of luck to you.
@@notsure7874 I don't see this as a big issue because I spent $10 on a couple of USB-multi charge cables, so from the same USB power sources (power bank, car, solar panels, laptops - all have the same USB connector and provide power) I can charge my iPhone (lightning connector), iPad/NanoVNA/Mini1300/etc (USB-C) and various other devices that use Micro-USB. That way not only can I meet my own power needs, I can help others that I might encounter. My experience of being out in the field (mostly emcomm and SAR, but some SOTA&POTA) is that it is important to be adaptable.
@@notsure7874 Actually I do all of my HF operating portable, and I carry my Mini 1300 because it is extremely useful for setting up antennas in the field. For example the audio tone SWR function is great for adjusting dipoles. I think your suggestion that there is a material weight difference between a USB-C cable and a multi USB cable is ridiculous. The weight difference between a Mini 1300 and a NanoVNA is quite significant - my NanoVNA weighs 153g and my Mini 1300 weighs 372g, more than twice as much. You say in another comment that you just purchased a Mini 1300, it seems strange that you care so deeply about the negligible weight difference between a USB-C cable and a multi USB cable (enough to write five replies about the same thing) yet you're not worried about purchasing a *much* *heavier* antenna analyzer. Strange that.
Help me please, Riview Max600
Just found it for $165 so bought it.
Mine is just good enough to keep me from buying a better one, ie…Rig Expert. BTW..mine was about $175 a couple years ago.
Have you used the VNA much at higher (>290MHz) frequencies, such as sweeping filters? I love my Mini 1300 and it does great things for me, but the VNA simply doesn't work above 290Mhz. (That being one of the clock frequencies in the unit, I think they use harmonics to reach higher freqs).
the price on your amazon link show 218$ + 37$ shipping to canada.. a nanoVNA here is around 100$ca and do the same (just not have the same screen presentation and both S1/S2 are sma)..
It is not correct that "NanoVNA does just the same" - looks like you didn't pay attention to the video. I have both the Mini 1300 and NanoVNA and greatly prefer the Mini 1300 because it does so much more, although on my unit the VNA capability does not work well on higher frequencies. Even with that limitation the Mini 1300 is much more useful to me.
@@danielayers sorry but for the price, i'm with nanoVNA (which have an useful software compatible OS and PC, with averaging, many graphs for each mesure and print the results).. if you have some difficulties with higher frequencies, do a calibration in this area.. a calibration is the key for precision..
@@MarcusPocus Whichever you prefer is up to you, but most of your reasoning is based on incorrect information. (Have you used a Mini 1300 much?) It is true the Mini 1300 costs more, but there are reasons for that. Much better screen for a start. Far easier to use - you don't have to recalibrate it every time you change frequency range. The Mini 1300 can perform a wider range of functions and output a wider range of information/graphs. With the latest firmware (free download if not already installed) the Mini 1300 supports two different protocols for interfacing with a PC, one of which is the same as the NanoVNA so you can use a Mini 1300 with the same PC software the NanoVNA uses. And regards you comment about calibration, you have misunderstood my comment to mean that I don't know how to use/calibrate the device - which is not the case.
Thank you.
I like point and shoot. N0QFT
I'm confused why the data transfer is via the usb-c port, but they have a separate tophat style mini usb from 2002 to supply power, as if the usb-c port can't do both like it does with the nanovna.
I'll buy one when they figure out charging that's not obsolete by more than a decade.
This is a silly comment, and wrong. The Mini 1300 (which I own) charges via the USB-C port. And if the shape of a USB port is what you would use to judge an entire device, then I find that very silly indeed.
@@danielayers Well then I guess the only source I could find that went over that, had it backwards then? What's the tophat one for then? Don't answer, because I don't care - if it's for computer control, or firmware updates I'm NOT doing that on the top of a mountain so it's irrelevant. I have everything I need - in the workshop which is where anything like that would happen.
It's not a silly comment when you consider the use case. What's silly is not considering any other use case than what's in your head. I'm not carrying a giant box of obscure charging cables out into the back country up a mountain. I have a kit, and it's standardized around usb-c for charging. There are reasons for this. Nothing I own has micro, much less tophat. I have a charging bank and roll up solar panel which is the only means of charging it I'll have for days at a time.
If it does charge via the c port, it would fit my use case. The (half in chinese) manual I found for it seems to say you're right, and the review I saw on it was wrong. So sue me. Jerk.
It’s based on an STM Discovery board… An evaluation board with the STM microcontroller and display so you can play with it, and decide if you want to use STM micros in your product. The Mini600/Mini1300 devices are the discovery board with an added RF board, battery, and a charge controller, all in a case. The charge controller uses the extra USB port for charging. The discovery board itself was intended to be powered any number of ways. Also, your comment is stupid.
@@BrekMartin I don't care what it's based on. Or what I can hack it to do if I had the desire to mod it. I care what it does. I wouldn't care so much if it used antiquated junk IF the use case were "in and around a radio shack". But that's not my use case. I'm not carrying 100 adapters in my kit. I'm carrying USB-C because that's what everything else uses. I've just kept on using my nanovna, and saved the 200 bucks.
If you can't think outside of your own personal narrow use case, perhaps it is not my comment which is stupid.
@@notsure7874It’s a lot heavier than the likes of a NanoVNA. That might discourage me from favouring it over the NanoVNA. Part of that weight is its much larger battery. In either case, you wouldn’t be charging either device on the top of a mountain unless your day’s efforts are all about impedance matching antennas, and not doing any actual radio hobby. No, it’s you. Your comment brings to light an extremely rigid and obtuse attitude, and is stupid.
🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️🙄??.
USE A TRIPOD!
Don't be an ass. Blood sugar levels to that to ya!
Thanks for this great review
73 de 4O7JAZ