SVBONY SV202, a Bad Sample? (1 Viewer)

[has530]

I recently got a TMB planetary 9mm eyepiece to try on my Celestron hummingbird spotting scope and it shows this exact same ring reflection. Maybe I will take it apart and see if I can figure out where it's coming from.

 

[exup]

I just did a quick check on my SV202 8x42, 8x32, 10x42 and 10x50.

I don't see this phenomena. On the 10x50, there could be some brightness outside the field stop using peripheral vision, but if I turn my eyes to look.... nothing. There is reasonable ER, so I need the eyecups fully extended in all pairs. If using glasses, the eyecups are fully closed ( I think).

I have another set of these and I can check these next week to see if any sample variation.

 

[yarrellii]

Yes, that's odd. As I mentioned, my 8x32 did not suffer from this, and I would have assumed that the 8x42 would be less likely to have issues that a more compact x32 model could have due to the compromise in dimension. In use, the behaviour against the light is frankly really good, better than the 8x32 as is expected from an 8x42. In fact, the view is as convincing as in the 8x32. Again, I don't have it with me, but I'd say CA is a little better than the 8x32, but this is really difficult to judge. Just like in the 8x32, I'd say CA is one of the areas were the SV202 is not at the same level of performance as other areas. But anyway it is still mind-blowing for the price.

I've been birding with the 8x42 some more and, together with the ring of reflection, my only serious niggle is the focus wheel. This morning we had a bright winter day, 10 ºC (50 F) and the focus wheel showed a noticeable resistance. It was smooth, there was no play, no irregular movement, everything was alright, it was simply on the hard side. So much so, that the metal ribbed wheel together with the temperature (the apparent temperature was 7 ºC) left some marks on my fingers after turning the wheel for a while. Have a look at my middle an index finger. Nothing terrible, but worth noticing. Again, I don't recall this happening with my 8x32.

 

[exup]

Yes, that's odd. As I mentioned, my 8x32 did not suffer from this, and I would have assumed that the 8x42 would be less likely to have issues that a more compact x32 model could have due to the compromise in dimension. In use, the behaviour against the light is frankly really good, better than the 8x32 as is expected from an 8x42. In fact, the view is as convincing as in the 8x32. Again, I don't have it with me, but I'd say CA is a little better than the 8x32, but this is really difficult to judge. Just like in the 8x32, I'd say CA is one of the areas were the SV202 is not at the same level of performance as other areas. But anyway it is still mind-blowing for the price.

I've been birding with the 8x42 some more and, together with the ring of reflection, my only serious niggle is the focus wheel. This morning we had a bright winter day, 10 ºC (50 F) and the focus wheel showed a noticeable resistance. It was smooth, there was no play, no irregular movement, everything was alright, it was simply on the hard side. So much so, that the metal ribbed wheel together with the temperature (the apparent temperature was 7 ºC) left some marks on my fingers after turning the wheel for a while. Have a look at my middle an index finger. Nothing terrible, but worth noticing. Again, I don't recall this happening with my 8x32.

View attachment 1552994

A metal focus wheel .... I don't think any of my other bins have metal, except maybe for ancient porros with a skinny black painted wheel.

In many ways the metal wheel feels better quality and probably chosen for grip when wearing gloves. The wheel tension is the same for all sizes; it is firm.

When cold, wear gloves, problem solved

 

[exup]

I just checked my second set of sv202 8x32 and 10x50 and no ring of brightness outside the field stop that I can see with peripheral vision on these either.

Also, regarding the skewed sharpness, here is Holgers report of the same phenomena on a Nikon HG

Review: Swarovski 8x30 CL Companion vs Nikon 8x30 Monarch HG

 

[Vesplume]

Hello,

I have both of them, the SV202 8x42 and the SV202 8x32.

I also see the miror effect around the circle of the image on the 8x42 and not on the 8x32.

For some of the positive sides of the SV202 8x42, though I consider that there is no really flaws taking account the price for both of them (135 euros for the SV202 8x42 and 90 euros for the SV202 8x32), I think that the kidney-bean effect is controlled in a better way on the 8x42 thanks to an appropriate length of the eyecups.
In addition, the control of the "ghost images" is better on the 8x42 in my opinion. I call "ghost images" the "artefacts" of objects that are behind me (for example a tree, a house, etc...) that I can see on the image when I look at a scene in front of me.

 

[yarrellii]

I have both of them, the SV202 8x42 and the SV202 8x32.

I also see the miror effect around the circle of the image on the 8x42 and not on the 8x32.

Exactly like in my case. It's weird that in your case it's also the bigger model that suffers from the ring of reflection/mirror. I wonder if it's a common trait with some 8x42 that only affects this format.

 

[Vesplume]

Exactly like in my case. It's weird that in your case it's also the bigger model that suffers from the ring of reflection/mirror. I wonder if it's a common trait with some 8x42 that only affects this format.

The SV202 8x42 was released after the SV 8x32/10x42/10x50. To me, the way they build the SV202 has changed for the 8x42 model. Binocollector said his 8x32 and 10x50 are not affected by this type of reflection. I'm pretty sure that the 10x42 does not have this effect.

Your pictures through the Vortex diamonback HD 8x32 show this effect as well. And according to Allbinos "blackenning inside the tubes could have been better". So maybe the reflection around the image has to do with " the quality of the interior of the barrels".

Reference :

Vortex Diamondback HD 8x32 - binoculars review - AllBinos.com

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.

www.allbinos.com

 

[yarrellii]

Your pictures through the Vortex diamonback HD 8x32 show this effect as well. And according to Allbinos "blackenning inside the tubes could have been better". So maybe the reflection around the image has to do with " the quality of the interior of the barrels".

Yes, absolutely. In fact, when I contacted Vortex they actually acknowledge that it was a consequence of lowering the costs in order to offer a model with great value. I think both the Diamondback and (even more so) the SV202 are terrific when it comes to value. If the 8x32 SV202 would have been my first binoculars... I wonder if I would have ever wished for anything more.

 

[Vesplume]

Yes, absolutely. In fact, when I contacted Vortex they actually acknowledge that it was a consequence of lowering the costs in order to offer a model with great value. I think both the Diamondback and (even more so) the SV202 are terrific when it comes to value. If the 8x32 SV202 would have been my first binoculars... I wonder if I would have ever wished for anything more.

Thanks for your confirmation and your personal experience with Vortex ! That's an interesting feedback with the SV202! I also think that someone looking for a cheap pair for his/her first steps in the world of optics would be impressed by this series.

 

[has530]

I had an interesting revelation today with regards to the ring of light. The TMB eyepiece I could very clearly see what you were describing in doesn’t always show it. It shows it in my celestron hunmingbird and celestron c90 mask cass however today when I put it in my Orion grand view ED 65mm it showed a perfectly black field stop. I suspect this has to do with clear aperture of the light cone at the field stop or stray light control but will look into it more this weekend. At the least I can say it isn’t purely down to the eyepiece.

 

[jackjack]

After hearing many good things about the SV202 ED I decided to try them for myself. To say the least I am very unimpressed. To start with the good:

• Quite compact and lightweight
• Nice focuser with no slack
• Don't feel flimsy or cheap
• Adequate glare control

Now for the interesting stuff, the bad. The easy things to complain about, strong pincushion distortion, FOV narrower than spec by about .2 deg, modest central sharpness, off axis CA at a medium level... but the real doozy for me is the asymmetry of the view. In both barrels, the bottom ~30% of the view is very blurry. Star testing shows this is largely astigmatism with some field curvature and coma. The left, right, and top of the FOV do not display this (although the top, opposite the blur does show the strongest CA).
My laundry machine sticker, in field center text is legible and CA well enough controlled:View attachment 1496113
At the top of the FOV there is much more CA but most text is still legible enough:
View attachment 1496111
And lastly at the bottom, the blurring anomaly sets in.
View attachment 1496112

My question is, was this behavior introduced by severe tilting of some elements to achieve collimation? Has anyone else with this model noticed this? I have been trying to return them for about two weeks now but they are balking asking for all sorts of verification photos of the problem but we shall see how that shakes out.

yes. high possibility of bad sample. have seen all SV202 multiple sample of some. and lot more under 250 MIC bin.
those Issue seem especially high on 8 power sv202 (maybe due to larger fov?)
8x32 sv202 has strongest fallout and at edges and largest FOV so there can be more chance to come across similar sample.

I think sv202's best power is it's central sharpness and focusing. good as bino about 300$ and more.

but due to bluish green tint, too high distortion and edge fallouts. it is bit uncomfortable to my eyes compared to nikon p7 and kowa yf

have seen 30$ ~ 500$ MIC roof bino.
quality tends to differs not only for the optics but also comfort for the eyes.... not always but many times expecially under 250$

 

[Binocollector]

It's certainly not as good as binos costing 300 or more. It's exactly as good as its price. I have 60€ porros that are clearly better.