New Svbony sa401 Apo 85mm released. (1 Viewer)

[Binastro]

Reading your post again I realise you have the 102mm f/4.9 doublet with ordinary glass.

This indeed may be worse than the ED spotting scopes.

The CA is considerable, also possibly spherical aberration.

In addition fast refractors cool badly and don't perform well until 30 minutes outside.
If the temperature continues to fall they may still not be good.

I have both the 80mm and 102mm fast refractors.

They may also not be very good at high magnifications, they may just not be made to very high standards.

Perhaps stop the 102mm scope down to 80mm.

The mirror should not be a problem. I thought you had a prism.

Also I doubt that the scope is much out of collimation, but an out of focus star should show this.

I used a custom made 123mm f/5.15 Jaegers objective refractor extensively.
Although it was good for deep sky objects, using it on Saturn, intensity estimates were not very accurate.

It showed stars down to magnitude 13.1 in town.
The most used magnification was 80x, but also 16x, 30x, 100x and 145x.
At 210x it was slightly out of collimation.
It is a cemented doublet without collimation possibility.

The 120mm refractors at 250x at 3 a.m.showed the tiny minute markings on a clock tower 4.7 miles away at one arcsecond over houses and parks.
They have very high quality hand made objectives.

Of the 20 refractors from 60mm to 135mm that I recall, two were of poor quality.
Four were ED glass, 14 ordinary doublets, one 105mm f/16 Fraunhofer objective and an essentially perfect Ross 100mm f/15 triplet.

In addition a Tewe Petzval 4 element 120mm aperture f/5 photo lens was of astro quality on Saturn.

The 172mm aperture Zeiss f/7 Aero Triplet from 1920 was also of astro quality and possibly aspherised. This a Cooke photo triplet.

I also briefly used the Harvard 9.5 inch refractor, and a Cooke 6 inch refractor.

I extensively used a 135mm f/16 observatory refractor.

My friend's 60mm Royal Japanese refractor showed Tethys and Dione.

To repeat, I am not surprised by the poor performance of the 102mm short focus refractor.
However, there are Baader fringe killer filters of different types and also a semi apo Baader filter that may help a lot, assuming that the objective is well made, which may not be the case.

We have had lying snow for a week and minus 7C or 20F.
Unusual for us.

Regards,
B.

 

[wllmspd]

A Cheap yellow astro filter works too, I used to have a 120mm f5 achromat that used on the moon, you get used to the slightly off colour, nice fine details visible. Any noticeable differences performance between the 46p and 401a given the large price difference. Am I right in understanding that they may be a 1.25” eyepiece adapter option for the 401a? Fixed eyepieces are certainly nicer to use.

I notice svbony have released an sv405a 85mm ED looking a lot like the 401a, just a little cheaper?!

Peter

 

[AstroGuy]

I have been having bad weather so could not collimate my refractor on a star, but I pulled out my Cheshire I use to collimate my newtonian reflactor. It works fine for collimating the Explorer Scientific 102AR refractor telescope but the patterns you see are different. I can see several crosses in different coloured discs (blue and green) through the Cheshire. According to Explorer Scientific you adjust the 2 sets of 3 collimation screws until all the crosses align. Here was the first problem. I could get all the crosses to align but not with the central Cheshire cross. I am assuming the focuser is also out of collimation and causes the crosses to be off axis. Second problem is when I put the star diagonal mirror back on and look through it with the Cheshire, I found that the star diagonal is also not collimated. I ended up collimating the telescope again with the star diagonal in the telescope. You can collimate the star diagonal, but it is easy to strip the screws or break the tabs holding the mirror, so I left it alone. You can also correct the focuser off axis problems, but this was getting to be too much work.

Bottom line is that astro refractors are much less rugged and easier to knock out of collimation vs my SVBony Spotting scopes (collimation was perfect when I checked both). The collimation helped a little, but the SVBony SA401 85MM (85MM Objective with 4 elements and 3 groups apochromatic refractor with 2ED elements) still beat the Explorer Scientific 102AR (102MM Objective lens air spaced doublet with optical glass non ED). For visual astronomy and terrestrial viewing the atmospheric condition limits the resolution more then the inherent optical resolution of these scopes. You would need extremely good seeing conditions or close distance to your viewing object to be limited by the resolution of these scopes. I am still surprised at how well the SVBony SA401 and SV46P spotting scopes performed versus the Explorer Scientific 102AR refractor telescope. This was not what I read on Cloudy Nights forum.

I had looked at the specs for the SV405a and they were not as good. They use less elements in the Objective lens and Ocular zoom eyepiece and the field of view was lower. I don't know how they actually compare side by side. I would be interested in knowing that. I have seen on Canadian Amazon, big discounts pop up for the SA401 making them close in price if you hunt for the discount. I got a huge discount on the SV46P (1/3 price on SVBony's website) and it included a camera adapter.

I have an eyepiece adapter for the SA401 apo spotting scope, but I don't think there is one available yet for the newer scope you mentioned. I would also be interested if someone had the SA401 and SV406P side by side to compare these scopes for optical performance.

 

[Binastro]

I have almost never had to collimate a refractor in decades of use.

Many have been custom made and have no collimation provision.
They have been made collimated and remain the same.

Some normally bought refractors have had the elements rotate in use, but they had pencil marks for best position and I just realigned the components.

The Ross triplet 100mm f/15 has a very small semi circle cut out of the edge of the three elements.
A metal rod goes through these semi circles, so rotation is impossible.

A brave optical maker cut out these half circles.

The short 80mm and 102mm refractors that I have don't have problems with collimation.

The biggest problem I had was trying to collimate the 520mm f/3.9 Newtonian.
I never got this excellently collimated by myself.

Regards,
B.

 

[AstroGuy]

I have almost never had to collimate a refractor in decades of use.

Many have been custom made and have no collimation provision.
They have been made collimated and remain the same.

Some normally bought refractors have had the elements rotate in use, but they had pencil marks for best position and I just realigned the components.

The Ross triplet 100mm f/15 has a very small semi circle cut out of the edge of the three elements.
A metal rod goes through these semi circles, so rotation is impossible.

A brave optical maker cut out these half circles.

The short 80mm and 102mm refractors that I have don't have problems with collimation.

The biggest problem I had was trying to collimate the 520mm f/3.9 Newtonian.
I never got this excellently collimated by myself.

Regards,
B.

There is a reason why the star diagonal and the objective lens plate come with collimation screws on the Explorer Scientific refractor scopes. I don't think collimation makes as big a difference on a refractor as it does on a Newtonian reflector, but I am no expert on refractor telescope collimation. This was a used Explorer Scientific 102AR and the mirror was out of collimation when I bought the telescope. The shop owner calibrated the mirror when I bought it used several years ago. I would have never known how bad it was out of collimation if I didn't try to collimate it after I did my first side by side comparison with the SA401 spotting scope and was so surprised at the difference in resolution.

 

[wllmspd]

None of the diagonals I have bought have adjustment, the mirror/prism is just pressed into the machined frame of the diagonal.

Peter

 

[Aandeg]

Hi everyone, it's been a while.

I ordered a Svbony SA401 with adapter for 1.25 eyepieces. It arrived yesterday and the scope is really a good-looking scope. The included neoprene protection is very nice and fits extremely well.

This is a mini review of my copy of the scope:

I have a Celestron Regal 80mm ed that I am comparing the SA401 APO to. I paid $469.99 for the SA401 Amazon had a 320 dollar coupon on it. Which is comparable to the Celestron at time of purchase some number of years ago.

To start the scope is a steal at 470 dollars, and betters the Celestron when using the included eyepieces. It was brighter at all magnifications. It also had less chromatic aberrations. Seeing the Celestron is pretty much the same price now I would say the SA401 is a better buy.

There is very little chromatic aberrations and the image is very sharp and clear at the lower magnifications. The scope does blur a bit at the highest magnification but backing off a little sharpens it right back up. The scope is pretty bright and has a cooler image then the Celestron. The image is also sharper at all magnifiactions then the Celestron with the original eyepiece.

Now the not so good. My copy of the scope has some internal reflection issues. When pointed toward a light source I get some washing out of the image. I would say it is slightly worse than the Celestron here. I also get some reflection issues if I do not have my eye right against the eyepiece rubber. That can be helped by shielding the eyepiece with your hand. I could not use the scope with glasses even with the eye relief specs provided. (The eye relief seemed much less than the specs).

I do not normally use my Celestron with the included eyepiece. Normally using the Hyperion Zoom mark IV or a 8mm astro eyepiece. The Celestron with the Hyperion Zoom nearly matches the Svbony SA401 in most aspects and beats the SA401 for color accuracy. I tried the Baader Zoom and it would not focus at infinity also tried the Baader 17mm which also would not focus at infinity on the SA401. They both only focus to about 160 feet or so. Trying simpler eyepieces with the adapter works fine. The 8mm Astromania was very nice as was a 25 mm Clestron I tried.

Also tried the SC001 camera with the scope. The bluish color really stood out in the images but could be fixed in post. There was chromatic aberration, but it was much less noticeable than my Celestron with the same camera. Unfortunately, I will be sending it back not because it's a bad scope, but because it is so close to the scope I currently use that it makes no sense to spend money on it. The reflection issues and the eye relief issue just won't work for me.

Dave.

 

[AstroGuy]

Hi everyone, it's been a while.

I ordered a Svbony SA401 with adapter for 1.25 eyepieces. It arrived yesterday and the scope is really a good-looking scope. The included neoprene protection is very nice and fits extremely well.

This is a mini review of my copy of the scope:

I have a Celestron Regal 80mm ed that I am comparing the SA401 APO to. I paid $469.99 for the SA401 Amazon had a 320 dollar coupon on it. Which is comparable to the Celestron at time of purchase some number of years ago.

To start the scope is a steal at 470 dollars, and betters the Celestron when using the included eyepieces. It was brighter at all magnifications. It also had less chromatic aberrations. Seeing the Celestron is pretty much the same price now I would say the SA401 is a better buy.

There is very little chromatic aberrations and the image is very sharp and clear at the lower magnifications. The scope does blur a bit at the highest magnification but backing off a little sharpens it right back up. The scope is pretty bright and has a cooler image then the Celestron. The image is also sharper at all magnifiactions then the Celestron with the original eyepiece.

Now the not so good. My copy of the scope has some internal reflection issues. When pointed toward a light source I get some washing out of the image. I would say it is slightly worse than the Celestron here. I also get some reflection issues if I do not have my eye right against the eyepiece rubber. That can be helped by shielding the eyepiece with your hand. I could not use the scope with glasses even with the eye relief specs provided. (The eye relief seemed much less than the specs).

I do not normally use my Celestron with the included eyepiece. Normally using the Hyperion Zoom mark IV or a 8mm astro eyepiece. The Celestron with the Hyperion Zoom nearly matches the Svbony SA401 in most aspects and beats the SA401 for color accuracy. I tried the Baader Zoom and it would not focus at infinity also tried the Baader 17mm which also would not focus at infinity on the SA401. They both only focus to about 160 feet or so. Trying simpler eyepieces with the adapter works fine. The 8mm Astromania was very nice as was a 25 mm Clestron I tried.

Also tried the SC001 camera with the scope. The bluish color really stood out in the images but could be fixed in post. There was chromatic aberration, but it was much less noticeable than my Celestron with the same camera. Unfortunately, I will be sending it back not because it's a bad scope, but because it is so close to the scope I currently use that it makes no sense to spend money on it. The reflection issues and the eye relief issue just won't work for me.

Dave.

thanks for the review and comparison with the Celestron Regal spotting scope. I too was interested in buying this spotting scope and recently seen big coupon discounts on Amazon.

I was able to get all eyepieces to focus at infinity by attaching the end lens element from one of the SVBony 2x Barlow, which had advertised detachable lens element for x1.5 Barlow effect (it will also shorten the focal lengths of the eyepieces). It worked on my Celestron zoom eyepiece, but the included SVBony zoom eyepiece was better in every way than than the Celestron zoom. I don’t have the Baader zoom, but on paper it has wider field of view at the longer focal lengths and about the same field of view at the shorter focal lengths. I find the included zoom eyepiece is optically design for the shorter end of the focal length. Much of the blame we say about shorter focal lengths come from poor seeing conditions from the atmosphere itself. You will notice this if you use a chart at much shorter range with smaller markings. The chart will be a lot less blurry, even when you scale size of chart for distance. This is also noticeable on days with very good seeing conditions, where the telescope resolution exceeds the the normal seeing conditions.

 

[AstroGuy]

Just for an update on the comparison of the SVBony SA401 85mm APO refractor vs Explorer Scientific AR102 102mm achromatic doublet refractor telescope, I completely collimated all eliminates of the Explorer Scientific AR102. The AR102 was off axis because one of the screws that attached the back part of the telescope was completely stripped (was bought used and didn't notice it). I reset the back of the telescope flush on the tube and collimated the telescope with the star diagonal removed and then collimated the star diagonal. The AR102mm is now as sharp as the SA401 spotting scope. The AR102 has more chromatic aberration as expected than the SA401. Where the AR102 can now beat the SA401 is when using my 2" Telvue 35mm Panoptic eyepiece for a sharp high contrast wide low magnification view (68 degree AFOV). I do not have a good 1.25" eyepiece to compare with the Televue 2" eyepiece. The built in zoom does not perform as well and is a much narrower field of view than the Panoptic eyepiece. The $20 SvBony 23mm aspheric eyepiece is better than the built in zoom at 23.5mm (62 degree vs 44 degree AFOV). But is a very unfair comparison with an eyepiece costing 30x more Canadian dollars. The built in zoom eyepiece performs relatively better at the shorter focal lengths (wider and has good eye relief for a short focal length eyepiece). This final result is more inline with what I was expecting comparing a midrange spotting scope with a good quality achromatic refractor with a slightly larger objective lens. I still find that the ruggedness and portability of the SA401 spotting scope make the spotting scope a good replacement for my AR102 refractor. I do miss being able to use my 2" Telvue Pantopic eyepiece for sharp wide field views.

 

[gcole]

Hi, I have bought one and it arrived 2 days ago (took 5 days to arrive from China to UK). I had a SV46 but decided to upgrade. It is absolutely amazing. The clarity is amazing. My friend has a Swarovski scope and he was speechless when he tried it. Weather a bit glum at the moment but it still picked up the smallest detail. It is quite heavy, was surprised at that but I use it with a backpack. Only problem most will have is that there are no agents/stockists (none that I could find anyway) so only way you can try it is actually buying it, which could have been a risk but I'm over the moon with it. I also bought the small 'Hummingbird' ED scope they do too. Cracking little scope, very compact and lightweight

The SA401 now on sale on Amazon for $387 with coupon.

 

[Paultricounty]

The SA401 now on sale on Amazon for $387 with coupon.

You can’t buy optics on Amazon, you should know that. That might be the only thing that all veteran BF members can agree on 😜🤣.

 

[wllmspd]

Not in the UK. At that price it’s be well worth trying out.
Peter

 

[AstroGuy]

You can’t buy optics on Amazon, you should know that. That might be the only thing that all veteran BF members can agree on 😜🤣.

That is not true. The highest quality optics spotting scopes are sold on Amazon Canada (for example Kowa scopes). Amazon sells the highest to the lowest quality scopes, with the price ranges that you would expect. The one good thing about Amazon is that you can often get really big discounts from SVBony products. I got a huge discount on my SVBony SV46P ED 20-60x80mm spotting scope. It was only $140 dollars Canadian with taxes and shipping included. It was bundled with a camera adapter, a tripod (although it was a low end stand), and digiscope adapter. For that price it is an absolute steal. This is not a bad spotting scope and I would say equivalent to many $800 spotting scopes. I also upgraded to the SA401 20-60x85mm APO triplet spotting scope, but did not get a great deal (I didn’t wait for the big discounts I usually do). I think there is a lot of optic snobbery that goes on. I see this in the birding community and in the astronomy community. It doesn’t help that there are so many cheap poorly made optics out there, but there are also a lot of very good deals out there too. You can pay a lot more for only a little bit of performance increase. You can spend a lot of time switching back and forth between scopes and eyepieces to hardly see a difference. Also optics vary by different users. I have eyepieces that are consider the highest end (also highest price) that for my eyes can cause kidney beaning effects, if I don’t place my eye in the exact position. I often use one of my cheapest eyepieces instead. It caused a lot of stir in the Astro community with snobs laughing at it without trying it and others who tried that were surprised at its performance. It is a very lightweight aspherical lens I paid less than $20 dollars for on Amazon. I use it more than my heavy Televue panoptic eyepiece costing 20x the price.

 

[Paultricounty]

That is not true. The highest quality optics spotting scopes are sold on Amazon Canada (for example Kowa scopes). Amazon sells the highest to the lowest quality scopes, with the price ranges that you would expect. The one good thing about Amazon is that you can often get really big discounts from SVBony products. I got a huge discount on my SVBony SV46P ED 20-60x80mm spotting scope. It was only $140 dollars Canadian with taxes and shipping included. It was bundled with a camera adapter, a tripod (although it was a low end stand), and digiscope adapter. For that price it is an absolute steal. This is not a bad spotting scope and I would say equivalent to many $800 spotting scopes. I also upgraded to the SA401 20-60x85mm APO triplet spotting scope, but did not get a great deal (I didn’t wait for the big discounts I usually do). I think there is a lot of optic snobbery that goes on. I see this in the birding community and in the astronomy community. It doesn’t help that there are so many cheap poorly made optics out there, but there are also a lot of very good deals out there too. You can pay a lot more for only a little bit of performance increase. You can spend a lot of time switching back and forth between scopes and eyepieces to hardly see a difference. Also optics vary by different users. I have eyepieces that are consider the highest end (also highest price) that for my eyes can cause kidney beaning effects, if I don’t place my eye in the exact position. I often use one of my cheapest eyepieces instead. It caused a lot of stir in the Astro community with snobs laughing at it without trying it and others who tried that were surprised at its performance. It is a very lightweight aspherical lens I paid less than $20 dollars for on Amazon. I use it more than my heavy Televue panoptic eyepiece costing 20x the price.

You didn’t have to go on that rant, I didn’t say they didn’t sell lots of optics, low and high quality. I was referring to what shows up to your door, seems to be different a lot of times than the description of new in the box. I myself had three occasions , all had to be returned. By the way, same with Walmart and sixth Avenue.

 

[AstroGuy]

You didn’t have to go on that rant, I didn’t say they didn’t sell lots of optics, low and high quality. I was referring to what shows up to your door, seems to be different a lot of times than the description of new in the box. I myself had three occasions , all had to be returned. By the way, same with Walmart and sixth Avenue.

I do a lot of research when I buy something on Amazon. I have yet to have received something other than what was expected. I have had items that had gone missing twice, but Amazon sent new replacement items no questions asked. For expensive items I would prefer to test the item out in a store, since telescopes and spotting scopes can vary individually in performance and also have defects and imperfections. Unfortunately, SVBony doesn’t sell directly through stores and I was willing to take a risk after purchasing two of their spotting scopes for very cheap prices. Amazon also has a very good return policy, depending on if they are the seller or stocking the item directly. Amazon does have it’s place.

 

[Paultricounty]

I do a lot of research when I buy something on Amazon. I have yet to have received something other than what was expected. I have had items that had gone missing twice, but Amazon sent new replacement items no questions asked. For expensive items I would prefer to test the item out in a store, since telescopes and spotting scopes can vary individually in performance and also have defects and imperfections. Unfortunately, SVBony doesn’t sell directly through stores and I was willing to take a risk after purchasing two of their spotting scopes for very cheap prices. Amazon also has a very good return policy, depending on if they are the seller or stocking the item directly. Amazon does have it’s place.

I absolutely agree with Amazon being very good with customer issues. Funny I’m reading this while I was just finishing up on the phone with Amazon getting a refund for a small item I bought that was delivered today. It was dog treats , but the box was opened. Amazon took care of it in less than five minutes. My experience with Amazon customer service exemplary. It’s some of the binocular sellers is where the problem was.

Paul

 

[gcole]

I have the SVBONY SA401 APO 85mm spotting scope and the SA406 1.25inch adapter. I also have the SVBONY SV46P ED 80mm spotting scope. The SV46P has a little bit more chromatic aberration, a little bit less resolution, less field of view and is less bright in low light conditions. The SV46P is a good spotting scope and I got it with a camera adapter on sale for $150 Canadian dollars (1/6 the price of the SA401). The SV46P has a nicer dual focuser and is a lighter spotting scope, but I use the SA401, because it is an optically better scope and I can swap eyepieces with my telescope eyepieces. I also have the SVBony 2x Barlow lens, with the removable lens element. By removing the lens element of the Barlow lens and attaching it to my telescope eyepieces I can always achieve focus at infinity. Some of my more expensive eyepieces will not achieve focus without the Barlow element added. The zoom lens on the SA401 works well at 7.5mm with a nice sharp 67 degree apparent field of view, with low chromatic aberration and low spherical aberration. At the lower power end of 22.5mm the zoom eyepiece has a lower 44 degree apparent field of view and is less sharp at the edges. The eye relief is good at all zoom levels. Also none of the Chinese scopes have true BaK 4 prisms as they use a different material in their prisms. The SV46P has a Chinese version of BAK4 prism, but the SA401 exceeds the SV46P in every way optically, although by not that much, with its K9 prism. I only wish it had the dual focuser of the SV46P.

Hi AstroGuy ….. Gwen here, can the zoom eyepiece on your SV46P be removed without compromising the integrity of its seal/water proofing ? If so maybe an adapter can be made to accept Astro eyepieces.

 

[SGBirder]

Hi AstroGuy ….. Gwen here, can the zoom eyepiece on your SV46P be removed without compromising the integrity of its seal/water proofing ? If so maybe an adapter can be made to accept Astro eyepieces.

SV46P eyepiece is non-removable. The equivalent with removable eyepiece is SV406P.

SV46/SV406 (without P in name) lack ED glass.

 

[gcole]

SV46P eyepiece is non-removable. The equivalent with removable eyepiece is SV406P.

SV46/SV406 (without P in name) lack ED glass.

Thanks

 

[AstroGuy]

SV46P eyepiece is non-removable. The equivalent with removable eyepiece is SV406P.

SV46/SV406 (without P in name) lack ED glass.

No the zoom eyepiece on the SV46P is not removable. That was the reason I got the SA401, which is removable and has an adapter. The SV406P can accept 1.25 inch eyepieces without an adapter. I got the SV46P on sale for 1/3 the regular price and it included an adapter for a camera to go over the zoom eyepiece. You had to choose between Nikon or Canon adapter. It was a steal at that price. The camera adapter holds the camera lens securely against the eyepiece and is adjustable to achieve proper proper focus. It produces better images than using a phone.