190 replies to this topic

[Jon Isaacs]

"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!)

 

 

The "You know you want scope" required her sympathy for the seller. It's hard to get much sympathy for Svbony.

 

Maybe, "this is such a good deal, I need to buy it just so I can give it away to someone needing a scope." 

 

That might work... 

 

My friend Bob calls it "consumeritis."  I'm starting to feel the symptoms both physically and psychologically.  Elevated heart beat, irrational thinking, "if this is good enough, I could sell the Zenithstar 103 and I'd still have the NP-101. Or:

 

"It would make a great loaner/travel scope."

 

The weak point in my operation is that she's the one with the Amazon Prime account.

 

Jon

[John R.]

 

The "You know you want scope" required her sympathy for the seller. It's hard to get much sympathy for Svbony.

 

Maybe, "this is such a good deal, I need to buy it just so I can give it away to someone needing a scope." 

 

That might work... 

 

My friend Bob calls it "consumeritis."  I'm starting to feel the symptoms both physically and psychologically.  Elevated heart beat, irrational thinking, "if this is good enough, I could sell the Zenithstar 103 and I'd still have the NP-101. Or:

 

"It would make a great loaner/travel scope."

 

The weak point in my operation is that she's the one with the Amazon Prime account.

 

Jon

Sounds strangely familiar. Except I’m more than fixed for refractors. My latest desire was the Astrotech Voyager III. But then the price jumped $20 and they are out anyway so I’m saved from “the conversation”. 
 

[DazeGazer]

Nothing against ED but he should stick to optical reviews. It's beyong clear he is not a mechanical person mentioning he often gets someone else to fix mechanical issues and often talks about how well something is made based simply on weight. Like this review the focuser was gritty but obvioiusly "well made". That is not well made.

 

He glances over the firest review sample had to be sent back as if it had nothing to do with quality control. Makes you wonder how much editors had to severaly edit his reviews, keep him focused, or just run interference for him back in the days or printed and published reviews.

Edited by DazeGazer, 18 March 2025 - 10:56 PM.

[CrazyPanda]

Like this review the focuser was gritty but obvioiusly "well made". That is not well made.

 

I mean... compared to any Gskyer telescope on Amazon, that focuser does indeed look much better made.

 

Can't speak to what he means by a gritty feeling, but that focuser is obviously in a completely different league from the typical stock rack & pinion focusers found on entry-level scopes.

 

He glances over the firest review sample had to be sent back as if it had nothing to do with quality control.

 

What should he have done/said? Just end the review right there? He mentioned it, said they gave him a sample where it was fixed. Up the viewer to decide what to do with that information.

[RichA]

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

the idea of having to argue with those creatures at Svbony in the case of bad optics holds no appeal.  Better to go with the Celestron or something similar.

[ayadai]

the idea of having to argue with those creatures at Svbony in the case of bad optics holds no appeal.  Better to go with the Celestron or something similar.

Or just wait for the second version. Early adoption has far too many pitfalls for my taste, regardless or origin (pun intended).

[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

Ok, I spent over an hour with Alnitak (zeta Orionis) and come away with a “maybe”. I boosted the mag up to 226x with what I suspect was fleeting detection right under the primary diffraction ring during fleeting moments of calm. Several of these “detections” were accomplished during the hour or so. 
 

Very difficult and uncertain, but only after did I check the PA and it is right where I “detected” the B star. 

[Russell Swan]

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...

The lens hood does push/pull on and off the lens cell without turning the cell. It’s a tight fit. Ed just didn’t do it that way. 

[Russell Swan]

Nothing against ED but he should stick to optical reviews. It's beyong clear he is not a mechanical person mentioning he often gets someone else to fix mechanical issues and often talks about how well something is made based simply on weight. Like this review the focuser was gritty but obvioiusly "well made". That is not well made.

 

He glances over the firest review sample had to be sent back as if it had nothing to do with quality control. Makes you wonder how much editors had to severaly edit his reviews, keep him focused, or just run interference for him back in the days or printed and published reviews.

The grittiness in the coarse focuser can adjusted away just by turning a little screw. It’s an adjustment, not a mechanical flaw. 
 

The SvBony 48p 102mm I own is a good achromatic refractor. Solidly build and more than mechanically sound. Now, for $229 what you get is a good deal. Is detail in assembly at the factory the same as with a $500+ offering? Probably not, they cut costs somewhere. The components quality however are nothing less than what one should expect for a typical quality achromat from any manufacturer. 
 

Maybe the focuser is a bit too tight. Adjust it.

 

Maybe the objective is screwed too tight in its cell, causing a little pinching seen as a characteristic star aberration. Loosen it. 

I understand we shouldn’t have to, but once I did the thing works very nicely for what it is. 

[CrazyPanda]

I understand we shouldn’t have to, but once I did the thing works very nicely for what it is. 

Heck for $229 I'd be happy if they shipped me the components and required me to assemble it myself.

[John R.]

Speaking of two speed focuser feel. 
I have both the AT70ED and AT80ED. The focusers appear to come from the same manufacturer, no surprise there. And yet while the AT80 focuser is smooth and dead silent the one on my AT70 has never been so. It makes a noise, like maybe I can hear the pinion moving on the rack. Still very smooth and feels and works fine, so I don’t mess with it, but I can easily hear it. On the AT80 I can’t hear it all unless I put my ear an inch from it and then can detect a faint sound. 

[CrazyPanda]

Speaking of two speed focuser feel. 
I have both the AT70ED and AT80ED. The focusers appear to come from the same manufacturer, no surprise there. And yet while the AT80 focuser is smooth and dead silent the one on my AT70 has never been so. It makes a noise, like maybe I can hear the pinion moving on the rack. Still very smooth and feels and works fine, so I don’t mess with it, but I can easily hear it. On the AT80 I can’t hear it all unless I put my ear an inch from it and then can detect a faint sound. 

I wonder if it's a grease issue. My 70ED focuser has a ton of grease on the rack, but the Svbony 70ED I have does not. Same focuser otherwise. The Svbony 70ED focuser is a bit smoother than the AT 70ED focuser, and I wonder if cleaning the grease off and lightly re-greasing it would help.

 

Could explain the noise difference in yours.

Edited by CrazyPanda, 19 March 2025 - 12:59 PM.

[ayadai]

Heck for $229 I'd be happy if they shipped me the components and required me to assemble it myself.

^This. Maybe I'm just an inveterate tinkerer and appreciate the opportunity to indulge in that craft, but minor issues that are easily adjusted out or even those that require minor disassembly are non-issues. A low price point is a bonus.

[LDW47]

^This. Maybe I'm just an inveterate tinkerer and appreciate the opportunity to indulge in that craft, but minor issues that are easily adjusted out or even those that require minor disassembly are non-issues. A low price point is a bonus.

Well said !

[Mike W]

Nothing against ED but he should stick to optical reviews. It's beyong clear he is not a mechanical person mentioning he often gets someone else to fix mechanical issues and often talks about how well something is made based simply on weight. Like this review the focuser was gritty but obvioiusly "well made". That is not well made.

 

He glances over the firest review sample had to be sent back as if it had nothing to do with quality control. Makes you wonder how much editors had to severaly edit his reviews, keep him focused, or just run interference for him back in the days or printed and published reviews.

Ed has been for years an asset to the hobby. I agree with the weight point being cast aluminum or pot metal weighs less but when broken can't be fixed. A machined from aluminum part usually can be disassembled and re-greased, filed, shimmed etc. For instance the 6" goto refractor I restored for a high school in CT. the scope mount was froze up but with cleaning, grease and adjustment will last another 60 years. Machined parts just last longer period!

https://www.cloudyni...goto-refractor/

Edited by Mike W, 19 March 2025 - 08:24 PM.

[LDW47]

Ed has been for years an asset to the hobby. I agree with the weight point being cast aluminum or pot metal weighs less but when broken can't be fixed. A machined from aluminum part usually can be disassembled and re-greased, filed, shimmed etc. For instance the 6" goto refractor I restored for a high school in CT. the scope mount was froze up but with cleaning, grease and adjustment will last another 60 years. Machined parts just last longer period!

https://www.cloudyni...goto-refractor/

Ed's the man !  All your talk has nothing to do with what Ed has been providing astronomers for years, performance of the scope has nothing to do with a nut here and bolt there, he leaves that to the so called mechanics in the crowd, eh. Never seen him profess to being a mechanic just like part time mechanics might not be the best astronomers, ya think.  PS:  They may not even be good mechanics, lol.  PPS:  Ed is the man !

Edited by LDW47, 19 March 2025 - 09:35 PM.

[SandyHouTex]

Is the name of the company really pronounced S V Bony as Ed is saying?

[RichA]

Ed's the man !  All your talk has nothing to do with what Ed has been providing astronomers for years, performance of the scope has nothing to do with a nut here and bolt there

Sorry, what?  Telescope use isn't a vacuum where only optics matter.  If that were true, people wouldn't fixate over needing things like smooth 2-speed focusers and adjustable lens cells, good solid mounts and well-baffled tubes.  One bad aspect of mechanics of a scope or mount can make their use more of a pain than a pleasure, and you are more likely to run into these issues in the cheap scope realm. 

[LDW47]

Sorry, what?  Telescope use isn't a vacuum where only optics matter.  If that were true, people wouldn't fixate over needing things like smooth 2-speed focusers and adjustable lens cells, good solid mounts and well-baffled tubes.  One bad aspect of mechanics of a scope or mount can make their use more of a pain than a pleasure, and you are more likely to run into these issues in the cheap scope realm. 

Say what you want, your point is a no go with most,eh. Do you think the majority that get into, that enjoy astronomy and telescopes get into it with the idea, with the intent to put wrench and screwdriver to them, really. Only those that don't know any better think they need to 99% of the time, lol. Ed never, ever professed to be a backyard mechanic, for many its an obsession to fix what doesn't have to be fixed, you can read it like a book, eh. I have been around for decades, in the wilds where you had to repair, to fix something beside a creek, a swamp, there was no choice. But sure as hell not a telescope, lol. Ed is the man not a false fixer, ya think.

Edited by LDW47, 20 March 2025 - 10:56 AM.

[Jon Isaacs]

Speaking of two speed focuser feel. 
I have both the AT70ED and AT80ED. The focusers appear to come from the same manufacturer, no surprise there. And yet while the AT80 focuser is smooth and dead silent the one on my AT70 has never been so. It makes a noise, like maybe I can hear the pinion moving on the rack. Still very smooth and feels and works fine, so I don’t mess with it, but I can easily hear it. On the AT80 I can’t hear it all unless I put my ear an inch from it and then can detect a faint sound. 

 

Sometimes a noise like that is simply the coarse focuser knob on the left side being too close in or the two speed knob being too close. Loosening the set screw and moving the knob so there's more clearance can resolve the issue.

 

Jon

[Jon Isaacs]

Ok, I spent over an hour with Alnitak (zeta Orionis) and come away with a “maybe”. I boosted the mag up to 226x with what I suspect was fleeting detection right under the primary diffraction ring during fleeting moments of calm. Several of these “detections” were accomplished during the hour or so. 
 

Very difficult and uncertain, but only after did I check the PA and it is right where I “detected” the B star. 

 

Russell:

 

Thanks for taking the time to help answer my question. Alnitak is pretty sensitive to seeing so the difficulty could just be the seeing. I have split Alnitak recently with an AT-70ED. .

 

I guess I'll just either have to buy a 48P myself or stop reading this thread... Which is more likely??

 

Jon

[Mike W]

Sometimes a noise like that is simply the coarse focuser knob on the left side being too close in or the two speed knob being too close. Loosening the set screw and moving the knob so there's more clearance can resolve the issue.

 

Jon

Same focuser on the 102 f7 ED and from all the reviews I have seen on Y/T focuser works great? The only difference is the f7 is rotatable, but from there back the same. The f7 also has a retractable dew shield, metal obj. cap and easily rotatable rings. 

 

 

https://www.bing.com...Jldmlldy8&ntb=1

Edited by Mike W, 20 March 2025 - 11:39 AM.

[vrodriguez2324]

I like Ed's videos. They provide context, references, history, comments on build quality and value, ergonomics, optical performance, target customer, etc. 

 

There always seems to be a point in his videos when he asks "So how are the optics/images/views?" If he finds them favorable he almost always answers with a sort of chuckle "Well, pretty darn good!"

 

The reviews are informative and enjoyable. This one is no exception.

 

-Victor

[Mike W]

I like Ed's videos. They provide context, references, history, comments on build quality and value, ergonomics, optical performance, target customer, etc. 

 

There always seems to be a point in his videos when he asks "So how are the optics/images/views?" If he finds them favorable he almost always answers with a sort of chuckle "Well, pretty darn good!"

 

The reviews are informative and enjoyable. This one is no exception.

 

-Victor

His web site has much more 

 

https://www.scopereviews.com/

Edited by Mike W, 20 March 2025 - 12:25 PM.

[Polyphemos]

I like Ed’s videos too. My favorite part of this video is when he compares the SV focuser to a Feather Touch;

 

”..it does a really good imitation of a Feather Touch focuser…cosmetically very very similar to a Feather Touch…”

 

only topped when he says,

 

“…it’s even a little bit grainy and grindy. Some people actually refer, prefer, that….”

 

I almost spit out a sip of my Manhattan when he said that! I guess his subconscious rebelled a bit as he had a hard time saying “prefer” and had to take two shots at it.

 

Ed’s always entertaining because you never know what he’s going to say. I also liked how he had the scope mounted backwards in the SV mount. Nice touch!