190 replies to this topic

[ayadai]

A good review by Ed Ting:

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=_OQJMsrL0fg

 

I'm a fan of 102-120mm achromatic refractors for general purpose visual, with my SW ST102 being my main grab-and-goto visual scope. If I were starting out today, the SVBony SV48P 102mm would likely be at the top of my list.

[Rick-T137]

I enjoyed his video as well. I was interested in watching it as I have a refractor with the same prescription (102mm f/6.5) but the focuser isn't quite as swanky as on the Svbony. Still, I very much enjoy the view through my Omni AZ 102.

 

Clear skies!

 

Rick

[Traveler]

Wondering whether the copy sent to Ed is exemplary for ordinary buyers.

[Jon Isaacs]

Wondering whether the copy sent to Ed is exemplary for ordinary buyers.

The first one was NG.... So they sent him a second one.  Any surprise the focuser seems fine?

 

Jon

[LDW47]

Wondering whether the copy sent to Ed is exemplary for ordinary buyers.

Why not all the other brands do the same with Ed, eh.  There is no doubt, wouldn't you want a good copy to have him review, lol.

Edited by LDW47, 17 March 2025 - 01:30 PM.

[Jon Isaacs]

Why not all the other brands do the same with Ed, eh.  There is no doubt, wouldn't you want a good copy to have him review, lol.

 

I believe Ed generally tests scope that are not supplied by the manufacturer.  That is always a red flag. He mentioned that specifically that Svbony did not supply his 90mm 48P.  

 

Jon

[LDW47]

I believe Ed generally tests scope that are not supplied by the manufacturer.  That is always a red flag. He mentioned that specifically that Svbony did not supply his 90mm 48P.  

 

Jon

Just commenting on what I think I am hearing, if I'm wrong, thats life, eh  I haven't yet watched his, usually, very accurate reviews, maybe I will tonite, maybe

Edited by LDW47, 17 March 2025 - 01:45 PM.

[turtle86]

A good review by Ed Ting:

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=_OQJMsrL0fg

 

I'm a fan of 102-120mm achromatic refractors for general purpose visual, with my SW ST102 being my main grab-and-goto visual scope. If I were starting out today, the SVBony SV48P 102mm would likely be at the top of my list.

 

Looks like an excellent scope for the money.  Thanks for sharing this!

[John R.]

I already have a 4 inch Celestron, all be it with a cheaper focuser. But if I was looking for one this would be on my short list, especially for the two speed focuser.

Even if Svbony sent a sample for evaluation and to be returned when he finished his review, I would still trust his objectivity. Svbony seems to have at least some teething problems with new telescopes. Witness the problems surrounding the introduction of their 105mm mak. As long as they provide good support to early adopters then all good. I only have a couple of their kids 60mm refractors bought because; A. Under $25 and, B. I wanted the focuser for a restoration job I was working on. (Although plastic it was marginally better than the plastic after market ones on ebay, and only cost a few dollars more.) 

[jrussell]

I watched his review last night as I've been considering getting a refractor. I'd already kind of been looking at this one but after watching his review and with it now on sale I'm starting to give in lol.

[Jon Isaacs]

Even if Svbony sent a sample for evaluation and to be returned when he finished his review, I would still trust his objectivity. Svbony seems to have at least some teething problems with new telescopes.

 

 

I trust Ed's objectivity.  But manufacturers have been sending reviewers products that have been worked over, adjusted, optimized for a long, long time.  The assumption Ed made was that a consumer would be purchasing a scope like this one rather than the first one.  

 

When a scope is sent by a manufacturer to a reviewer at the manufacturer's request... You have to keep your eyes open. 

 

Hopefully it is a good scope.  And at $229, it is a bargain if it is not seriously flawed optically. Even if the focuser is as funky as the 90mm 48P, it is still usable and better than other focusers in the 102mm F/6.5 achromat market. 

 

Jon

[edsmx5]

I trust Ed's objectivity. But manufacturers have been sending reviewers products that have been worked over, adjusted, optimized for a long, long time. The assumption Ed made was that a consumer would be purchasing a scope like this one rather than the first one.

When a scope is sent by a manufacturer to a reviewer at the manufacturer's request... You have to keep your eyes open.

Hopefully it is a good scope. And at $229, it is a bargain if it is not seriously flawed optically. Even if the focuser is as funky as the 90mm 48P, it is still usable and better than other focusers in the 102mm F/6.5 achromat market.

Jon

While I agree that a manufacturer supplied OTA could be massaged, in this case maybe they just sent him the new model.
I purchased a 102mm SV48P when they first came out; the focuser was TERRIBLE! There were also many complaints about the optics, to the point where SVBONY was offering to replace the objectives, or offer a return/refund. I opted to return mine, as an AT102ED came into my life. Had I not found the AT102, I would have accepted a new objective and lived with the focuser.
I'm guessing that maybe they offered Ed one from the second production run, after the optics problem was solved.

Edited by edsmx5, 17 March 2025 - 05:03 PM.

[Jon Isaacs]

While I agree that a manufacturer supplied OTA could be massaged, in this case maybe they just sent him the new model.
I purchased a 102mm SV48P when they first came out; the focuser was TERRIBLE! There were also many complaints about the optics, to the point where SVBONY was offering to replace the objectives, or offer a return/refund. I opted to return mine, as an AT102ED came into my life. Had I not found the AT102, I would have accepted a new objective and loved with the focuser.
I'm guessing that maybe they offered Ed one from the second production run, after the optics problem was solved.

 

Ed:

 

At this point, it's a matter of "maybe" and a "guess." 

 

I hope you are right but until CN members share their experiences, I will be skeptical, particularly about the focuser.  They have had a lot of time to fix it.. 

 

Jon

[Russell Swan]

Ed:

 

At this point, it's a matter of "maybe" and a "guess." 

 

I hope you are right but until CN members share their experiences, I will be skeptical, particularly about the focuser.  They have had a lot of time to fix it.. 

 

Jon

I have the scope as referenced in my profile. The corrected second iteration made available Dec. 1, 2024. The focuser is supposed to be the one used on their 503ED series. For me, when I received it, the course focus was a little too rough, but a tweak of the little black screw smoothed it out. No slop in the focus tube either. 
 

The optics produce nice round airy discs at low to mid power. Very nice indeed. At higher power there may be a little excess brightness to the first diffraction ring when splitting doubles, but that could just be from my typical so so seeing conditions. An easy, clean split of Algieba at ~119x.

i am also using the SvBony color correction filter.

Edited by Russell Swan, 17 March 2025 - 07:31 PM.

[Jon Isaacs]

 

 

The optics produce nice round airy discs at low to mid power. Very nice indeed. At higher power there may be a little excess brightness to the first diffraction ring when splitting doubles, but that could just be from my typical so so seeing conditions. An easy, clean split of Algieba at ~119x.

i am also using the SvBony color correction filter.

 

 

I'm hoping to read more positive reports like yours. Round stars are good, using a filter is fine, it's an achromat.

 

I'd be interested in hearing how it does on a more difficult double like Zeta Orionis, 2.4" mag 1.9- 3.7. That was one that my 90 mm 48P struggled with.

 

How much did you pay? Even $300 is pretty good price considering the focuser and stuff. (The dew shield does not slide, right?)

 

At $229... That's tempting just to try it out.. I'm well fixed in 4 inch refractors but idiot Jon likes 4 inch refractors.

 

Jon

Edited by Jon Isaacs, 17 March 2025 - 08:07 PM.

[LDW47]

I have bought a couple of pretty nice scopes after watching Ed T's reviews, excellent quality, great performers. He tells it like it is in basic terms that can be easily understood and analized by those that enjoy astronomy. But what I don't like and can't believe are the ones that say they are fellow astronomers that follow Ed just to critisise, refute his professional opinions of a piece of astro gear, just like a movie critic. Maybe they would be better following Hollywood movies, eh. I have noticed this trend over a long time.  But its just IMHO, as always, eh. Or maybe I'm all wrong, maybe.

[Jon Isaacs]

I have bought a couple of pretty nice scopes after watching Ed T's reviews, excellent quality, great performers. He tells it like it is in basic terms that can be easily understood and analized by those that enjoy astronomy. But what I don't like and can't believe are the ones that say they are fellow astronomers that follow Ed just to critisise, refute his professional opinions of a piece of astro gear, just like a movie critic. Maybe they would be better following Hollywood movies, eh. I have noticed this trend over a long time.  But its just IMHO, as always, eh. Or maybe I'm all wrong, maybe.

 

 As far as I know, he is not an optical professional, he is an amateur astronomer who is sharing his experiences and opinions.  

 

Jon

[bobhen]

I trust Ed's objectivity.  But manufacturers have been sending reviewers products that have been worked over, adjusted, optimized for a long, long time.  The assumption Ed made was that a consumer would be purchasing a scope like this one rather than the first one. 

 

When a scope is sent by a manufacturer to a reviewer at the manufacturer's request... You have to keep your eyes open. 

 

Hopefully it is a good scope.  And at $229, it is a bargain if it is not seriously flawed optically. Even if the focuser is as funky as the 90mm 48P, it is still usable and better than other focusers in the 102mm F/6.5 achromat market. 

 

Jon

Agree.

 

Not only in this case but in ALL cases when products are "supplied" to reviewers and influencers. 

 

One should also keep both eyes very wide open if you get an optical test report from the manufacturer. Do you think they would send you a test report that did not meet their specs.  The lens might not but the test report will. 

 

Bob 

[Russell Swan]

 

I'm hoping to read more positive reports like yours. Round stars are good, using a filter is fine, it's an achromat.

 

I'd be interested in hearing how it does on a more difficult double like Zeta Orionis, 2.4" mag 1.9- 3.7. That was one that my 90 mm 48P struggled with.

 

How much did you pay? Even $300 is pretty good price considering the focuser and stuff. (The dew shield does not slide, right?)

 

At $229... That's tempting just to try it out.. I'm well fixed in 4 inch refractors but idiot Jon likes 4 inch refractors.

 

Jon

I payed $220.00 on a presale in late Nov. of the newly corrected version direct from SvBony. Couldn’t resist, since I was yearning for such a wide field with some reach, which I lacked. 
 

The dew shield is a removable, tight fitting push/pull attached to the objective cell which screws onto the tube.

In my case, the objective was a bit over tightened in its cell resulting in triangular star shapes under close inspection. A little pinching going on. I relaxed the tightening to just beyond the first resistance and perfectly round stars were the result. Excellent collimation, which is good because there are no adjustment screws. I mentioned the focuser earlier. 

 

So, as received a little tweaking was required to make it perform to its full potential. 

I have not yet pushed it to beyond 119x, since it is not my intent to use it that way. I will give Zeta Orionis a shot tonight. The seeing is predicted to be middling at best but let’s see what it can do. I’ll start at 119x.. 
 

Edited by Russell Swan, 18 March 2025 - 08:16 AM.

[CrazyPanda]

The focuser looks a lot closer to a KUO focuser than the 90mm model's did.

 

The 90mm model had three pairs of screws 120 degrees apart to fine-tune the focuser slop. It was clearly not a KUO focuser.

 

The 102mm version seems to have two big screws at the top to provide pressure against the top side of the tube, and it has two pairs of screws 90 degrees apart for mounting finder shoes on either side.

 

If that's not a KUO focuser (the likes of which are found on Svbony's ED scopes), it's a convincing imitation of one.

Edited by CrazyPanda, 18 March 2025 - 09:45 AM.

[LDW47]

 As far as I know, he is not an optical professional, he is an amateur astronomer who is sharing his experiences and opinions.  

 

Jon

I call Ed what I want to call him based on what I see of his exploits, no where does it point out descriptions, eh. If that bugs some, then just ignore.  PS:  And the word Ameteur is supurflous as I have mentioned before, in my book of terms, eh.

Edited by LDW47, 18 March 2025 - 09:00 AM.

[RLK1]

 

I'm hoping to read more positive reports like yours. Round stars are good, using a filter is fine, it's an achromat.

 

I'd be interested in hearing how it does on a more difficult double like Zeta Orionis, 2.4" mag 1.9- 3.7. That was one that my 90 mm 48P struggled with.

 

How much did you pay? Even $300 is pretty good price considering the focuser and stuff. (The dew shield does not slide, right?)

 

At $229... That's tempting just to try it out.. I'm well fixed in 4 inch refractors but idiot Jon likes 4 inch refractors.

 

Jon

"At $229... That's tempting just to try it out.. I'm well fixed in 4 inch refractors but idiot Jon likes 4 inch refractors."

 

Hmm, something tells me it's time for Jon to talk to the Mrs again, "Jon, you know you want that scope!"

 

PS: Still 70 bucks off on Amazon for $229.00, shipped! (Free returns with prime!)

[CrazyPanda]

"At $229... That's tempting just to try it out.. I'm well fixed in 4 inch refractors but idiot Jon likes 4 inch refractors."

 

Hmm, something tells me it's time for Jon to talk to the Mrs again, "Jon, you know you want that scope!"

 

PS: Still 70 bucks off on Amazon for $229.00, shipped! (Free returns with prime!)

Yeah it's tempting just to satisfy some curiosity.
 

[RLK1]

The first one was NG.... So they sent him a second one.  Any surprise the focuser seems fine?

 

Jon

The first one, sent by the manufacturer, wasn't any good optically, as were the early samples previously reported on in the forum. So, first it wasn't a focuser issue with the initial sample, it was an optical issue, and likely the same as others who reported a thin lens in the first production run was to blame and that has been remedied in the subsequent production run. The complaint that Ed did have regarding a focuser was in regards to the 90mm model and not the one in question.

 

Additionally, IMO, the fact that Svbony initially sent him a dud tends to negate the narrative that a manufacturer-supplied scope is being manipulated to produce a better product with the intentions of having a better review.

[RLK1]

The first one, sent by the manufacturer, wasn't any good optically, as were the early samples previously reported on in the forum. So, first it wasn't a focuser issue with the initial sample, it was an optical issue, and likely the same as others who reported a thin lens in the first production run was to blame and that has been remedied in the subsequent production run. The complaint that Ed did have regarding a focuser was in regards to the 90mm model and not the one in question.

 

Additionally, IMO, the fact that Svbony initially sent him a dud tends to negate the narrative that a manufacturer-supplied scope is being manipulated to produce a better product with the intentions of having a better review.

I'll add the thing that would freak me out a bit is if an attempt to slide/remove the dew shield actually removed the lens in the cell instead. Yikes! I do understand it can easily be screwed back onto the tube but that's not something I would prefer to experience...