Roof prisms (Svbony SV202 10x42) Chromatic aberration, cushioning, blurring at edge - comparison, example pictures? (1 Viewer)

[asphaltradler]

Hi folks,
just registered here to come get some clarity with some things I noticed with the above mentioned binocular.

I'm coming from a scientific background and was wondering why most reviews are so highly subjective ("I notice no CA whatsoever") when it's quite easy to make some objective photos.
I bought this bino because of the good reviews I read, and am mostly satisfied with sharpness in the center and build quality. But I see blue and purple fringes around every high contrast lines (CA) and the cushion distortion and edge blurring seems to me similar to my 70s and 80s Revue and Zeiss Jena binos which in all reviews I saw are very low rated in that respect, e.g. in Carl Zeiss Jena Deltrintem 8x30 - binoculars review - AllBinos.com:

• Chromatic aberration Good to average correction in the centre, not very high at the edge. 6.5/10.0"
• Distortion The distance of the first curved line from the field centre compared to the field of view radius: 31% ± 3% 3/10.0
• Blurring at the edge of the FOV The blur occurs in the distance of 64% ± 5% from the field of view centre. 1.5/10.0

whereas modern roof binos mostly get quite better notes.
Am I oversensitiv here, and other don't notice that as much, or do I have a "lemon" item?
I wrote to Svbony and sent some example pictures, they say that is totatally normal in binoculars ;-) But My Zeiss Deltrintem has defintely less CA, and a cheap 8x26 Ddoptics bino had less sharpness but also almost no cushioning - so it's possible!

Why are there so few pictures taken through the oculars to compare aberrations and distortions?

I would appreciate if some other folk with Svbony or similar optics (Vortex, Opticron, Nikon etc.) could look at my pictures here and take some similar ones. It's quite easy, for AR just some building edges or tree branches or so against bright sky, in center and edges, and cushioning is really easy to see with rectangular shapes like modern buildings across the street. I don't understand why bino reviews don't just make example pictures of a something like that, pinned to a wall in say 5m:


So here come my pictures. I would really like to know if it's really normal or not. I think I could live with the cushioning, but the CA is annoying, I just can't not see that blue fringe around high constrasts.

Cushioning, and depth of focus. Also blue fringe around the whole FOV:


Blue and red CA at roof top when at upper edge of FOV, with detail:


Even in the center, now more purple:


If you look at my last picture, there is virtually no black line that hasn't some blueish fringe, as in the window frames in the next pic. Normal? I must admit I don't notice it every time, but it's there if I look for it, and sometimes it's a PITA:


Here for comparison my 80s Zeiss Jena Deltrintem 8x30, so naturally smaller but I think less CA. FOV is very big in comparison and so is blurring at the wider FOV, but in center it's not much worse I think if we look only to the 2nd window - which has no color fringe.


At last: Markedly worse sharpness & constrast, but almost no cushioning and I think even less CA (well, perhap because lines aren't sharp enough) with the small Ddoptics Ultralight 8x26:


I know these are no birding pictures, but for comparing sharpness, coloring etc. I think man-made rectangular, sharp structures are much better! Cushioning will be almost unnoticable in nature (apart from regular trees or so), but the CA is there with cartainty, especially with object not completely in the center of FOV.

What do you think?
I really would like to see some similar pictures from "across the street".

 

[dries1]

Well it is an SV Bony and one has to make sure you got a good sample, which can require more than one attempt.
Using a camera to show CA through a binocular can be misleading, the camera lens may contribute CA.
Hope you rectify your issues with the SV Bony.

 

[tenex]

Surely pincushioning (which is horrible here) can't be a matter of sample variation; can CA? I just can't understand the glowing reviews some people (like Neil English) post about cheap products like this, even if they happen to have got a (relative!) cherry. A better instrument could be bought used, without putting more carbon in the atmosphere.

On the other hand, it's worth noting that the blue ring around the entire FOV can even turn up in a high-end binocular like Zeiss SF.

 

[asphaltradler]

Well it is an SV Bony and one has to make sure you got a good sample, which can require more than one attempt.

Exactly that, if it my sample or generally so, is what I want to find out!

Using a camera to show CA through a binocular can be misleading, the camera lens may contribute CA.

Yes, I know this, and tried several times, but the outcome is 100% identical with that what I see myself.
Because of that, I would like to see some pictures from other users. With same or similar binoculars.

 

[Binastro]

Pincushion distortion varies. Some is desirable for many observers.

CA is dependent firstly on aperture.

So a 30mm binocular is likely to have less CA than a 42mm.

A 26mm is likely to have little or no CA.

It depends also on focal ratio, number of glass elements, glass types and design.

B.

 

[pat mitchel]

I would at least PM "Dipperdapper" - AKA Neil as he wrote a lengthy evaluation of several Svbony binoculars, then simply go down the list of other contributors to the thread and PM as well to see if they saw what you are perceiving.

Product Review: The Extraordinary Svbony SV202 8 x 42 ED.

Evening All, Please find attached my latest review on the new Svbony SV202 8x 42 ED binocular: https://neilenglish.net/product-review-svbony-sv202-8-x-42/ I hope you find it interesting! Kind Regards, Neil.

www.birdforum.net

I supect sample variation- hopefully you will be able to satisfy the conclusion that it is a problem with THIS bino and get a return approved.
Pat

 

[Binocollector]

Looks okay to me. A good vintage porro will often have less CA. And Zeiss binos are still very good, especially when looking at the center.
A small 8x26 will of course have less pincushion distortion in a smaller FoV. Pincushion distortion is a design choice of the manufacturer not a defect. It's there to counter the distortion of your own eyes. So everyone will see it differently. You can't really judge how well it works in use when taking a pic through the bino.
I like taking pics through the binos but am well aware that the pincushion distortion always looks more extreme in the pics than when actually using the thing.
I have the Svbony SV202 in 10x50 and 8x32. For the price they are fine. That being said - they lack eye relief and for an ED bino the off axis CA is indeed slightly (too) high but off axis CA is caused by the eye piece.
But compared to the plastic binos that Nikon offers at the same price - I'd take a Svbony any day.
Are they perfect? No. Can they compete with the "big ones" for 3x or even 10x the price? Certainly not.
But for the 120 € I paid for the 8x32 it definitely beats a plastic Nikon.
A 7x35 Action EX however has better eye relief.
And vintage porros are hard to beat IMHO. One reason I collect those things. Heck, my "Scope" 7x50 (60€ on ebay) from the 70s is sharper on axis than my 700€ Fujinon FMTR. Not nearly as bright of course though.

 

[asphaltradler]

Looks okay to me. A good vintage porro will often have less CA. And Zeiss binos are still very good, especially when looking at the center.
A small 8x26 will of course have less pincushion distortion in a smaller FoV. Pincushion distortion is a design choice of the manufacturer not a defect. It's there to counter the distortion of your own eyes. So everyone will see it differently. You can't really judge how well it works in use when taking a pic through the bino.
I like taking pics through the binos but am well aware that the pincushion distortion always looks more extreme in the pics than when actually using the thing.
I have the Svbony SV202 in 10x50 and 8x32. For the price they are fine. That being said - they lack eye relief and for an ED bino the off axis CA is indeed slightly (too) high but off axis CA is caused by the eye piece.
But compared to the plastic binos that Nikon offers at the same price - I'd take a Svbony any day.
Are they perfect? No. Can they compete with the "big ones" for 3x or even 10x the price? Certainly not.
But for the 120 € I paid for the 8x32 it definitely beats a plastic Nikon.
A 7x35 Action EX however has better eye relief.
And vintage porros are hard to beat IMHO. One reason I collect those things. Heck, my "Scope" 7x50 (60€ on ebay) from the 70s is sharper on axis than my 700€ Fujinon FMTR. Not nearly as bright of course though.

Thank for your contribution!
If you own 2 Svbony, could you please offer some pics to compare?
My intention is very much to get some more objectivity here by undisputable images. I think CA as well as geometrical distortion can be judged quite reliably by photos through the oculars, when resolution is good enough. (Sharpness, not so good because of pixelisation and jpeg compression).

Or pics with other binos please. I still know absolutely nothing, one says it looks horrible, must be a defectable item, the next it's all normal 😩.

 

[Binocollector]

CA maybe but pincushion distortion cannot be judged from a picture as I tried to explain in my previous post. It is a very personal thing. A camera lense doesn't have the same distortion as your own eyes.
I myself for example are rarely bothered by pincushion distortion and/or rolling ball effect. The only thing that annoys me is mustache distortion or when the distortion profile changes too much over the FoV. Still not really a problem, for example in my Komz 7x30 which is known for the rolling ball effect which I barely notice however.
I can take some pics tomorrow of course. Already dark out at the moment.

 

[Paultricounty]

It’s possible it could be unit to unit variation so best is to return and replace. The central image pretty sharp. Unfortunately you can’t expect to much optical quality in this price range.

 

[Brink]

You are expecting way too much out of these binoculars

 

[Binocollector]

It’s possible it could be unit to unit variation so best is to return and replace. The central image pretty sharp. Unfortunately you can’t expect to much optical quality in this price range.

They are pretty good for the price. Definitely better coatings than a Nikon Action EX for example. But they are what they are. Not better nor worse than I'd expect for the price.
My "Made in the Philippines" Fujinon 10x42 KF for example has less CA despite not being advertised as "ED" glass.
But my DDoptics "Lux HR" models (which were also sold by Sightron so I would guess they might also be from the factory in the Philippines since the Fujinon KFs and some Sightron models are similar but I am not sure) are better -- of course also more than twice as expensive.
So you get what you pay for mostly does apply.
I think the build quality is excellent though. Super smooth focuser and the focus is also pretty "snappy". You definitely know when you reached focus.
The size is slightly large for the 10x50 which to me indicates that the manufacturer doesn't have the knowledge (yet) to make them more compact without introducing even more CA.
Edit: BTW -- I don't think exchanging them for a different unit would make a difference. The pictures look pretty much like what I see through mine. CA does look slightly amplified in the pics as they are enlarged. But these do definitely have some amount of off-axis CA. Never noticed much of it in the center though.

 

[Binocollector]

I took some pics but didn't have time to set up the tripod.
So one through the SV202 10x50 and the 2nd one through the DDoptics Lux HR, which did have an official price of 550€ when it was still sold. The SV202 10x50 was 190€ when I bought it.
I don't see that much of a difference. The Lux HR is a flat field design (so less field curvature but it also has less pincushion distortion).
Svbony:

Lux HR:

The Svbony has slightly warmer colors and higher pincushion dist. as can be seen by the field in the bottom which should be a straight line. I don't see all that much CA in the Svbony. There is some on the roof of the caravan in the back and on the grey tarp on the right side. But I don't feel that it is an annoying amount.

And two more:
Svbony -- some slight fringing on the white stripe but also not that annoying I think. Maybe I just have high tolerance for CA but I have binos where it does bother me, on others it doesn't even though being visible when "forcing" it.

Lux HR:

Definitely more pincushion in the Svbony. But not unlike many other binoculars that I own. Even though pincushion distortion and field curvature are two different forms of abberation, it seems like the flat field binos that I own also have less pincushion distortion in general.
The two models in question -- the Lux HR is one of the shortest 10x50 binos out there AFAIK. So the optical design has to be quite more sophisticated as the CA-levels are relatively low and it has the flat-field design. Probably my best 10x50.

edit: the Lux HR is still sold by Perl as "EscapED" -- even cheaper than the DDoptics was. But I didn't pay full price for mine anyway.

Jumelles Prismes en Toit Escaped 10x50 ED

Jumelles en prismes en toit d'un grossissement de 10 x et d'un diamètre de 50 mm Verres ED FPL51 pour un chromatisme extrêmement diminué Prismes recouverts d'un traitement diélectrique Molette de mise au point en métal avec rugosité pour une belle fluidité Réglage dioptrique centrale Adaptée aux...

www.perl-vixen.com

 

[Binastro]

The photos above seem reasonably correct.

However photos lie, despite the idea that photos are truthful.

Digital cameras have inbuilt correction for distortion and for reducing colour fringing.

This may and probably does vary.

With cameras that take different lenses, the makers own lenses may be profiled, so the camera knows which lens is being used.
But older lenses and lenses not made by the maker may have no correction or unknown correction.

In addition the photos need to be taken at the same time, side by side in the same lighting conditions.

The FOV of the eyepieces is also relevant.

As is the fact that makers specifications may be incorrect.
A 10x42 maybe 10x38, 9.5x something or 10.5x something.

I have found that Leica, Zeiss and probably Swarovski have accurate specs, but others not so much.

I don't have a smart phone, but presume the cameras also apply correction.
Compact digital cameras do sometimes apply corrections.

This is before any manipulation done by the photographer,

Old film cameras are usually fairly accurate.

Regards,
B.

 

[Binocollector]

I'm well aware of all that and already explained that you cannot judge a bino without looking through it.

 

[Binastro]

In this respect I think that our eyes are probably more accurate than photos.

Regards,
B.

 

[Binocollector]

True, and color fringing for example looks definitely exaggerated when zooming in on those pics and making them way larger than the actual view through the bino would show them. Also, when the camera is not perfectly in focus, fringes look worse.

 

[asphaltradler]

I think before we have any pictures with vertical lines in it as in mine, I'm as wise as before regarding distortion 😩
Are there really no house, fences or so?
And no, I dont think that camera (Iphone here) contributes much, because 1) Looks with eyes same 2) no distortion with the Ddoptics.
Excuse my Bad English & Spelling pls, because Im on Seminar this Week and habe only the iphone (with german KB) with me

 

[asphaltradler]

I don't have a smart phone, but presume the cameras also apply correction.
Compact digital cameras do sometimes apply corrections.

Yeah but then we would have less CA not more. And fringing by digital Filters Look quite different from optical ones, especially they would be Uniform across the whole rrctangular Image, irrespective of distance from Center. But as you See, at top edge its blue top/Red bottom, in Center purple.
Excuse mE this touch keypad kills me

 

[Binocollector]

I think before we have any pictures with vertical lines in it as in mine, I'm as wise as before regarding distortion 😩

Pincushion distortion is usually the same horizontally as vertically. I specifically took pictures of horizontal lines. BTW-- I really don't think what you are seeing through the bino is "variation between different specimen". They are all like that. So either you like the SV202 or not.
BTW -- I think that setup with all the houses and windows is a very artificial and not very usefull setting. No bino with pincushion distortion will work very well for looking at architecture. You could get something like a 7x30 or 10x42 Komz for that. They have almost zero rectilinear distortion.
This thread is beginning to feel like an exercise in futility.
I'm out.
Edit: I did in fact take pics of vertical lines, too -- the distortion is the same as on the horizontal lines.
So, what do you wanna hear? The bino is fine, it is pretty much like the ones I have, I don't think that is "variation", the chance, you're gonna get a better one by exchanging it, are slim to non-existent. CA will occur in most binoculars off-axis, especially in roof prism binos. To completely eliminate it, you will have to probably spend quite a bit more than 190€ (or what you paid for the 10x42).
Or look for an old Canon 8x32WP -- that is one of my best binos when it comes to being CA-free. But even in that one I can "eek it out", when I want to. And the Canon 8x32 WP has other issues like spiking, not to mention, it is not made anymore.
A porro prism bino will usually have less issues with CA but pincushion distortion and curvature will probably not change all that much.
Using binos with smaller FoV will make pincushion distortion less obvious.
BTW -- the "Lux HR" I used for taking the pics is still available from Perl/Vixen as "EscapeED". The 10x50 has the best eye-relief on the 10x42 it is too short for me to use with glasses.

Jumelles Prismes en Toit Escaped 10x50 ED

Jumelles en prismes en toit d'un grossissement de 10 x et d'un diamètre de 50 mm Verres ED FPL51 pour un chromatisme extrêmement diminué Prismes recouverts d'un traitement diélectrique Molette de mise au point en métal avec rugosité pour une belle fluidité Réglage dioptrique centrale Adaptée aux...

www.perl-vixen.com