190 replies to this topic

[RichA]

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!

There are some more expensive Chinese focusers showing up on Ebay and aliexpress.  I'm wondering if anyone has tried them out?  Generally, the Chinese stuff looks good, but sometimes lacks the finesse and it shows up in real use.  I guess this is why Feathertouch still dominates the aftermarket for higher-end focusers.

[vrodriguez2324]

His web site has much more 

 

https://www.scopereviews.com/

I can tell he likes reviewing equipment and sharing experiences. Thanks for sharing.

 

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!

He's okay with leaving in a few mistakes vs reshooting a segment. He says "mirror cell" and an asterisked "lens cell" fades in and out. No biggie. I appreciate the sound quality of his videos and how he approaches reviews from a visual and imaging standpoint. 

[scotsman328i]

FYI.

 

Info on refractor objectives. 

 

https://www.ianmoris...jective-lenses/

[Polyphemos]

I can tell he likes reviewing equipment and sharing experiences. Thanks for sharing.

 

He's okay with leaving in a few mistakes vs reshooting a segment. He says "mirror cell" and an asterisked "lens cell" fades in and out. No biggie. I appreciate the sound quality of his videos and how he approaches reviews from a visual and imaging standpoint. 

Don’t get me wrong; I’ve gotten a lot of very good information from Ed Ting’s videos, and my wife and I are always excited when his latest video pops up in our feed. Ed doesn’t profess to be an expert in anything, and his easy going personality and his small gaffs are part of the charm. I wasn’t being facetious when I said I like his videos too.

[kgb]

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

See here:
https://www.cloudyni...you-say-svbony/

[Lagrange]

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. 

The Meade 178ED being a prime example where a good optical design was let down by poor mechanicals.

 

What should have been a groundbreaking knock-it-out-of-the-park win for Meade ended up with a very poor reputation and a lot of disappointed customers*.

 

* and many who were happy their purchase - quality control and sample variation really let the scope down.

[LDW47]

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

Funny you should mention all of that, lol.  Truer words were never spoken / posted.

[LDW47]

I can tell he likes reviewing equipment and sharing experiences. Thanks for sharing.

 

He's okay with leaving in a few mistakes vs reshooting a segment. He says "mirror cell" and an asterisked "lens cell" fades in and out. No biggie. I appreciate the sound quality of his videos and how he approaches reviews from a visual and imaging standpoint. 

And with his occasional little smile he may even throw in some of those gaffs intentionally, lol.  I would, eh. It contributes to these up or down threads, lol. Part of his entertainment, its in his smile, his facial expression, maybe. But it bugs the hell out of the fanatics, for sure, unfortunately !

[ayadai]

There are some more expensive Chinese focusers showing up on Ebay and aliexpress.  I'm wondering if anyone has tried them out?  Generally, the Chinese stuff looks good, but sometimes lacks the finesse and it shows up in real use.  I guess this is why Feathertouch still dominates the aftermarket for higher-end focusers.

One of the first things I tend to do with new equipment is tear it apart to see how it's put together. The GSO crayford focuser I purchased from Agena was very well-built and similar to other crayfords I've torn into, including the WO on my C6R. At US$170 the GSO was far from cheap in my estimation; I'm unsure how this compares to the more expensive Chinese focusers.

 

The 10:1 R&P on the SVBony SV48P 102mm is one feature that tempts me to get the scope just so that I can take the focuser apart and see how it works. I think I'll resist, however, as I already have the SW ST102 with its faster focal ratio. If SVBony were to come out with a similarly designed and priced 120mm achromat, it would make the short list.

[Russell Swan]

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

I bought it for the low price point with the hope it would be a good for low to mid power, wider field option for me. It meets my expectation for that purpose. I intend to keep it, and use it frequently. 
 

When I jack up the magnification above 100x the first diffraction ring is somewhat brighter than what I would like to see, likely the result of red and blue light not reaching precise focus in a faster achromat. If so, that’s not necessarily peculiar to this particular scope, but I don’t have a lot of experience with fast achromats. 
 

So, it is what it is and that’s good enough for me, or for someone who has other scopes in their collection. If it were to be my only scope then no, absolutely not. For a beginner? Sure, you could do a lot worse.
 

If you do try it out, I would be interested to hear if you needed to adjust the focuser. I also loosened the tension on the objective to remove what I detected as a little pinching. It was screwed down tight.  Once I did those issues were alleviated. 
 

I will try again on Alnitak weather permitting. 

Edited by Russell Swan, 21 March 2025 - 07:42 AM.

[LDW47]

You will learn that all the expert critics will, by chance, leave out any little quick fixes that could very easily aleviate a small issue for a beginer or even some experienced astronomers ie a focuser adjustment. Its their trade secret, part of their critic, maybe a I know more than you secret. It happens not just in astronomy and Ed T knows this by his expression, his chuckles. For his stature in several fields Ed is a pretty down to earth astronomer giving us a good basic lesson on his chosen subject for the nite, good enough for most to form their thoughts around it. I think he expects our own intelligence to kick in on the whatever subject not just robitize on his half hour presentations, we are thinking for ourselves humans, right. LOL !  PS:  A couple of his long ago reports on a couple of older refractors, Chinese built in the mid 90's, got me searching for and buying them, they were very good scopes, I never regretted it and passed them on after trying them in my Bortle 5 backyard and my Bortle 1 remote camp. Ed is the man, for sure, eh !

[25585]

You will learn that all the expert critics will, by chance, leave out any little quick fixes that could very easily aleviate a small issue for a beginer or even some experienced astronomers ie a focuser adjustment. Its their trade secret, part of their critic, maybe a I know more than you secret. It happens not just in astronomy and Ed T knows this by his expression, his chuckles. For his stature in several fields Ed is a pretty down to earth astronomer giving us a good basic lesson on his chosen subject for the nite, good enough for most to form their thoughts around it. I think he expects our own intelligence to kick in on the whatever subject not just robitize on his half hour presentations, we are thinking for ourselves humans, right. LOL !  PS:  A couple of his long ago reports on a couple of older refractors, Chinese built in the mid 90's, got me searching for and buying them, they were very good scopes, I never regretted it and passed them on after trying them in my Bortle 5 backyard and my Bortle 1 remote camp. Ed is the man, for sure, eh !

Ed was critical of focusers on 6" & smaller Dobsonians. All product reviewers/influencers are the same, they want to continue being sent products to review by the manufacturers - Ed was loaned the 4" by Svbony (& a TV 85 by Tele Vue).

[scotsman328i]

I hear what you're saying and that's one reason why I thought about initially posting a link to Ed's youtube video about the scope but decided not to because of what you've stated. IMO, the nitpickers and the Ed Ting haters/trolls seem to come out of the woodwork so I decided someone else can post a link to his videos for a change and go down the rabbit holes with these guys...

Doesn’t matter what you post, the peanut gallery will dig a rabbit hole for whatever is posted and by whoever. Just brush them over and ignore them. Do they pay your wages or owe you money or something? It’s the internet. They’re only masters of the universe in their own minds.

Plus, there’s nothing in CNs TOS stating you have to acknowledge and/or answer them. 

[LDW47]

I thought we were all supposed to be in astronomy together including Ed not look over our shoulder to see whats coming down about nothing, eh. Backyard mechanics, really !

[Jon Isaacs]

I bought it for the low price point with the hope it would be a good for low to mid power, wider field option for me. It meets my expectation for that purpose. I intend to keep it, and use it frequently. 
 

When I jack up the magnification above 100x the first diffraction ring is somewhat brighter than what I would like to see, likely the result of red and blue light not reaching precise focus in a faster achromat. If so, that’s not necessarily peculiar to this particular scope, but I don’t have a lot of experience with fast achromats. 
 

So, it is what it is and that’s good enough for me, or for someone who has other scopes in their collection. If it were to be my only scope then no, absolutely not. For a beginner? Sure, you could do a lot worse.
 

If you do try it out, I would be interested to hear if you needed to adjust the focuser. I also loosened the tension on the objective to remove what I detected as a little pinching. It was screwed down tight.  Once I did those issues were alleviated. 
 

I will try again on Alnitak weather permitting. 

 

 

Russell:

 

Again, I am glad to read of your experiences with the 102 mm 48P.  I concur that it should be a solid low to mid power, wider field option. And in the presence of a larger scope to do the planetary and close double star observations, it's all that one really needs.

 

I felt the same way about the 90mm F/5.5 version of the 48P.  The focuser wasn't the greatest but it was workable and better than anything else in it's class.  And if you were totally frustrated with the focuser, the two speed could be easily disabled and you had a smooth solid single speed.  I had great fun with the 90mm 48P.

 

The difficulty I have with scopes like this is that I can't leave well enough alone. I see a refractor, particularly attractive refractors like both 48Ps that could be mistaken for an ED/apo scope, and I have to test it on double stars. Challenging doubles are not the forte of faster achromats and so I ended up replacing the 90mm F/5.5 Achromat with a 90mm F/6.2 FPL-53 William Optics doublet.  It is clearly a superior double star scope but I am not sure it was the right choice.  It's larger, heavier, doesn't offer the very wide fields of the 48P... 

 

Anyway, I am happy to read of your experiences the 102mm 48P.  It sounds like a great value for the money.  $229 for a 4 inch F/6.5 with a 2 speed focuser, if I saw that in the CN Classified, I would think that's one heck of a deal.  At this point I have temptation at bay. I would really like to try out one of these but it's hard to justify spending $250 when I have an NP-101 and a ZenithStar 103 but I have resisted temptation before, only have the devil find his way.. 

 

Some years ago, Explore Scientific had the AR-102 on special for $300.  It included a finder and a 2 inch Dielectric diagonal.  I was able to resist for some months and it went off sale December 1st.  Then it went back on sale right before Christmas.  It was a fine scope, it had a two speed and some nice optics but it was just to darn ugly.. That coffee can dewshield, it drove me nuts.

 

 

I will say this about Svbony, it seems like they listen to their customers.  When the first version of the 102mm 48P turned out to be problematic, they fixed them, replaced them.  

 

Jon

[RichA]

Russell:

 

Again, I am glad to read of your experiences with the 102 mm 48P.  I concur that it should be a solid low to mid power, wider field option. And in the presence of a larger scope to do the planetary and close double star observations, it's all that one really needs.

 

I felt the same way about the 90mm F/5.5 version of the 48P.  The focuser wasn't the greatest but it was workable and better than anything else in it's class.  And if you were totally frustrated with the focuser, the two speed could be easily disabled and you had a smooth solid single speed.  I had great fun with the 90mm 48P.

 

The difficulty I have with scopes like this is that I can't leave well enough alone. I see a refractor, particularly attractive refractors like both 48Ps that could be mistaken for an ED/apo scope, and I have to test it on double stars. Challenging doubles are not the forte of faster achromats and so I ended up replacing the 90mm F/5.5 Achromat with a 90mm F/6.2 FPL-53 William Optics doublet.  It is clearly a superior double star scope but I am not sure it was the right choice.  It's larger, heavier, doesn't offer the very wide fields of the 48P... 

 

Anyway, I am happy to read of your experiences the 102mm 48P.  It sounds like a great value for the money.  $229 for a 4 inch F/6.5 with a 2 speed focuser, if I saw that in the CN Classified, I would think that's one heck of a deal.  At this point I have temptation at bay. I would really like to try out one of these but it's hard to justify spending $250 when I have an NP-101 and a ZenithStar 103 but I have resisted temptation before, only have the devil find his way.. 

 

Some years ago, Explore Scientific had the AR-102 on special for $300.  It included a finder and a 2 inch Dielectric diagonal.  I was able to resist for some months and it went off sale December 1st.  Then it went back on sale right before Christmas.  It was a fine scope, it had a two speed and some nice optics but it was just to darn ugly.. That coffee can dewshield, it drove me nuts.

 

 

 

I will say this about Svbony, it seems like they listen to their customers.  When the first version of the 102mm 48P turned out to be problematic, they fixed them, replaced them.  

 

Jon

Yes, the ES are pretty expensive now, but they are well-built and very good performers.

[ayadai]

All product reviewers/influencers are the same, they want to continue being sent products to review by the manufacturers - Ed was loaned the 4" by Svbony (& a TV 85 by Tele Vue).

Ed is sufficiently well established and his content is diverse enough to where I feel he has the ability to pick and choose what (and whether) to review. I therefore doubt that he's all that strongly influenced by a need for a steady stream of product from manufacturers.

 

I decided someone else can post a link to his videos for a change and go down the rabbit holes with these guys...

I resemble that remark!
 

[Mike W]

Ed is sufficiently well established and his content is diverse enough to where I feel he has the ability to pick and choose what (and whether) to review. I therefore doubt that he's all that strongly influenced by a need for a steady stream of product from manufacturers.

 

I resemble that remark!
 

Some of his scopes he buys, some are loaners from individuals, some are loaners from manufacturers, some are from star parties. To 25585, all are NOT the same!

Edited by Mike W, 21 March 2025 - 04:38 PM.

[Russell Swan]

Russell:

 

Again, I am glad to read of your experiences with the 102 mm 48P.  I concur that it should be a solid low to mid power, wider field option. And in the presence of a larger scope to do the planetary and close double star observations, it's all that one really needs.

 

I felt the same way about the 90mm F/5.5 version of the 48P.  The focuser wasn't the greatest but it was workable and better than anything else in it's class.  And if you were totally frustrated with the focuser, the two speed could be easily disabled and you had a smooth solid single speed.  I had great fun with the 90mm 48P.

 

The difficulty I have with scopes like this is that I can't leave well enough alone. I see a refractor, particularly attractive refractors like both 48Ps that could be mistaken for an ED/apo scope, and I have to test it on double stars. Challenging doubles are not the forte of faster achromats and so I ended up replacing the 90mm F/5.5 Achromat with a 90mm F/6.2 FPL-53 William Optics doublet.  It is clearly a superior double star scope but I am not sure it was the right choice.  It's larger, heavier, doesn't offer the very wide fields of the 48P... 

 

Anyway, I am happy to read of your experiences the 102mm 48P.  It sounds like a great value for the money.  $229 for a 4 inch F/6.5 with a 2 speed focuser, if I saw that in the CN Classified, I would think that's one heck of a deal.  At this point I have temptation at bay. I would really like to try out one of these but it's hard to justify spending $250 when I have an NP-101 and a ZenithStar 103 but I have resisted temptation before, only have the devil find his way.. 

 

Some years ago, Explore Scientific had the AR-102 on special for $300.  It included a finder and a 2 inch Dielectric diagonal.  I was able to resist for some months and it went off sale December 1st.  Then it went back on sale right before Christmas.  It was a fine scope, it had a two speed and some nice optics but it was just to darn ugly.. That coffee can dewshield, it drove me nuts.

 

 

 

I will say this about Svbony, it seems like they listen to their customers.  When the first version of the 102mm 48P turned out to be problematic, they fixed them, replaced them.  

 

Jon

SvBony had no choice but to fix the first iteration of the scope or take it off the market altogether, it was that bad. That episode did them no favors in terms of reputation for what is considered a budget, discount brand to begin with. However, the telescope is just fine. I feel I have enough experience to endorse it as a viable, less expensive alternative achromat which performs as one should reasonably expect, again with a user adjustment or two maybe required. 

Edited by Russell Swan, 21 March 2025 - 05:45 PM.

[25585]

Some of his scopes he buys, some are loaners from individuals, some are loaners from manufacturers, some are from star parties. To 25585, all are NOT the same!

On refractors, I find Ed to be spot-on usually. Remembering his vlogs on 80mm fracs particuarly. He is right about SCTs too, like the C9.25 being good (I still want one!) 

[Traveler]

mmm, I thought this topic was about the SVBony refractor. It seems to be more about influencers and Ed in particular. Since there is no moderation to get us back on track, I'll say something about it.

 

1] Aren't we all influencers with our opinions here on CN?

 

2] products that makers send to reviewers: in Ed's case, he says it at least several times in the video cited. I don't find this to be a problem at all this way. Ed has been doing his beautiful work for a very long time. (I once bought my Traveler partly based on his review in 1998).

3] Another hobby of mine is high-end audio. Reviews from independents who buy their own products are very rare. For me, it is up to the buyer and his ears to decide what he buys. The same for astrogears. At most it will inspire me to look into a reviewed product.

4] Mr. Spock and David H. Levy linked their names to brands and certain telescope models. Is that bad? Don't think so. At every moment we are tempted to make purchases that we did not know beforehand that we needed the product.

 

 

-> Maybe someone should start a separate thread on this subject. Then we can elaborate on that a little more... <-

 

Did I say more about it than I wanted to... sorry. Back to the SVBony.

 

Has anyone tried the 48P with a Quark?

[Traveler]

Oh and isn't it nice that we can discuss everything on this forum and not just the products of our sponsor Astronomics?

 

 

 Thanks Astronomics!! 

[RichA]

SvBony had no choice but to fix the first iteration of the scope or take it off the market altogether, it was that bad. 

Not just crappy Maks then, or eyepieces that self-destruct?

[Russell Swan]

Not just crappy Maks then, or eyepieces that self-destruct?

The first iteration of the SV48p 102mm was basically unusable.  The later version which I purchased is not like that. The copy I received is a good, solid achromat which performs well. I have no regrets given the $229 payed for it. 

 

The Maks they sell are not the best available, but they are less expensive also. They have a market niche. You understand what you are getting, and your standards are reasonably high, so their Maks are not for you. That’s fine. 

 

I am speaking only of my experience with the SV48p 100mm.  I am one happy customer of the scope. It’s all metal, no plastic. Build like a tank. The focuser is good, not great. Nothing to complain about. It comes very well collimated, which is good because it lacks collimation screws. 3rd mag and dimmer stars are nice round and small airy discs in far less than ideal seeing conditions at low to mid power. Brighter stars and the crappy seeing conditions at my suburban, New England home conspire against testing resolution at higher powers. 
 

Then again I didn’t purchase it for its high power capabilities. It’s a portable, grab & go, fast wide field refractor. That’s the best purpose for any such 102mm f/6.5 achromat. 

 

That’s basically what I have to report, if it helps others to decide on a purchase. 
 

[LDW47]

Not just crappy Maks then, or eyepieces that self-destruct?

Give us all a break, maybe. Has Svbony been the only great astro company to have growing pains, eh. You seem to be a knowledgable authority but if they aren't whats the purpose of rubbing that around, really.  LOL !