I really like the 8x30/32 format, to my eyes it hits a sweet spot for versatility, optical performance, ease of use and portability. I have just checked, and 8x30/32 is by far the most repeated format of all the binoculars I've had, accounting for 31 models, followed by quite a margin by 7x42 with 12 models. I find 8x30/32 just suits my needs very well for a general birding binocular (when I'm not using the IS 12x36, that is). Then if you combine 8x30 with Porro prisms the result can be addictive. One of my all-time favourites is the Nikon EII 8x30, which I enjoy using every week, but which has its limitations (I've suffered internal fogging, fungus, and then it has this awkward tilt when hanging from a neck strap), so the prospect of a modern waterproof 8x30 Porro really entices me. Now enter the Sky Rover ED 8x30.
As a counterbalance for the mighty EII there's (yes you've guessed it) another of my all-time favourite binoculars, the value king Kowa YF (and it's siblings and II iteration). So for this short first impressions post I'll be using both the more expensive EII and the cheaper Kowa YFII, both 8x30 Porro I'm very familiar with.
The Sky Rover feels well in the hand, it's compact, the body appears somewhat stubbier than the EII (which is already pretty stubby). It weights exactly the same as the EII, to the very gram: 565 g. On first impression, I really liked the form factor, but after comparing them back and forth, I think I still prefer the more sculpted "shoulders" of the EII. The YF II feels toyish in comparison. It is much lighter and all the materials seem less durable. However, having used it for several years, and having tortured a YF as a glovebox unit, I can't fault Kowa's build quality.
The SkyRover impresses at first sight with its metal body and what seems a very solid build. However, after playing it for a while, you discover things that somehow diminish that perception. The dioptre adjustment ring feels a little flimsy, and what seems to be a solid axis/shaft in the hinge (like in the EII) is actually a sleeve that you can turn accidentally with your fingers. When focusing and using a classic Porro I tend to rest my finger on the axis of the bridge, and withouth noticing I've actually rotated this black metal sleeve making the serial number appear on the front of the axis and not on the back as it originally was.
The glass on the eyepieces of the SkyRover is wider than that on the EII, however the coatings seem to reflect more light (I honestly don't know wether this is actually relevant or not). This is also the case on the objective lenses. Above Kowa, in the centre SkyRover, below EII.
The glasses on the EII seem to reflect less light. Also, when looking inside the tubes of the SkyRover you can see that the finish is not as refined, materials are cut more "raw/rough" and show irregular borders, not polished and refined.
The view through the SkyRovers is very nice, full of contrast, maybe a little more than the EII, colour balance seems also alright. CA is really well controlled, I'd say better than the EII and the Kowa, even though neither has a poor performance in this area. Despinte not wearing glasses, I can't see the entire FOV of the EII (this happens also with other wide angle binoculars, especially Porros, where I can't see the field stop using a natural viewing position). I reckon I get to see around 8,5º of the 8,8º, so the difference in FOV between what I can see in the EII and the SkyRover is hardly noticeable.
BUT... now comes the underwhelming bit. The moment I've started using the SkyRover for a longer while, chasing passerines among branches I've discovered an extremely annoying effect. I'm not fussy about edge performance, neither am I obsessed with super wide fields. These are things I can value (I use both an EII and an ELSV) but I'm not anal about them. However, when the degradation of the image becomes bothersome then we have a problem. I've had this happen with some models. I remember the view through the 7x33 Celestron Granite: it was wide and the centre was very crispy, with a great feeling of depth, but after a while I discovered a really annoying feeling that I was looking at a doughnut of blur that surrounded a sharp centre with a very abrupt transition. Well, here I've experienced something similar. The blurriness becomes simply bothersome, it affects the view. I'm not prone to feeling nauseated by a fuzzy or blurry view, the way some people get somehow dizzy by extreme low distortion (like in the EL), but here it is very annoying because it simply distracts you from what you are looking at.
I'm well aware that taking pictures through the eyepiece of binoculars is often a bad idea if you're trying to represent what your eyes see, but either way I've tried to capture what I see. Here I've looked at an almond tree that has a nest box. I've placed the nest box on the lower end of the FOV and here you can pretty much see what I see (including the blue ring on the field stop in the SkyRover.
EII - SkyRover - YFII
As you can see, the performance of the SkyRover is really poor. The Kowa is only 7,5º, but even if you try to cut out the outer degree of the SkyRover, the view is equally blurry. Again, I'm not bothered by poor edge performance, it's not that, what spoils the view is the way this creeps towards the centre to the point that when following a bird jumping from branch to branch it becomes unbearable.
To see the extent of this, I've tilted ever so slightly the tripod head I was using in order to place the nestbox to about 1/3 to 1/4 inside the FOV.
Again: EII - SkyRover - YFII.
As you can see, even if I've erred on the safe side and the nest box on the image through the SkyRover seems to be the one furthest away from the field stop, it is by far the worse. Again it's quite amazing how well the Kowa performs. In fact, comparing the SkyRover to the Kowa, I'd say that they perform according to price. Yes, the view through the SkyRover seems to be a bit more vibrant and the image seems to display a little more contrast, but the difference is not staggering. The little Kowa holds its places as a great entry-level propostition.
In terms of usability I've basically, encountered something I find unacceptable for the price and aspirations.
But then I've discovered something else... After using the SkyRover some more, I've started to feel some discomfort, probably stemming from the fact that the two tubes provided a distinctly different view. No sooner said than done: I've compared both tubes using the same eye and there is a clear (and I'd say beyond acceptable) difference in performance. All the pictures above have been taken through the right tubes of the binoculars, and it turns out the right tube on the SkyRover is clearly subpar. While the left tube still offers a pretty poor edge performance, it's not as terrible.
Left - Right
As you can see, the image really degrades on the right tube (pay no attention to the colour bias, I have not noticed that when in use, it has probably more to do with the automatic white balance on the camera). You can also see the blue ring on the field stop, that can also be viewed when in use.
So I'm probably dealing with a subpar unit, which does not speak highly of SkyRover quality control. Yes, probably all binoculars have slight discrepancies between the two tubes, even more so at this price point, but I've discovered this because I felt something weird while looking through the binoculars (somehow the same way you can feel a slight eye strain after using slightly out of alignment binoculars for a while).
As a side note, I just can't get over how good both the EII and the Kowa YF are. Yes, I think that in 2023 the EII is overpriced and I don't think I'd buy one for the going prices it has. Yes, the Kowa YF has become pricier, not "around the 100 € mark" anymore, but more like 160 - 170 €, and it's getting some serious competition from the likes of Svbony (although this is not a Porro and still has to prove it can match Kowa in terms of reliability and QC). So, my quest for a binocular that blends the virtues of the EII and the YF still continues... In my dreams I see a Kowa YFII Plus, at around 250 - 300 €, with improved coatings, FOV, focus wheel and construction. Or else an EIII with updated coatings, waterproofness and a quicker focus wheel.
As a counterbalance for the mighty EII there's (yes you've guessed it) another of my all-time favourite binoculars, the value king Kowa YF (and it's siblings and II iteration). So for this short first impressions post I'll be using both the more expensive EII and the cheaper Kowa YFII, both 8x30 Porro I'm very familiar with.
The Sky Rover feels well in the hand, it's compact, the body appears somewhat stubbier than the EII (which is already pretty stubby). It weights exactly the same as the EII, to the very gram: 565 g. On first impression, I really liked the form factor, but after comparing them back and forth, I think I still prefer the more sculpted "shoulders" of the EII. The YF II feels toyish in comparison. It is much lighter and all the materials seem less durable. However, having used it for several years, and having tortured a YF as a glovebox unit, I can't fault Kowa's build quality.
The SkyRover impresses at first sight with its metal body and what seems a very solid build. However, after playing it for a while, you discover things that somehow diminish that perception. The dioptre adjustment ring feels a little flimsy, and what seems to be a solid axis/shaft in the hinge (like in the EII) is actually a sleeve that you can turn accidentally with your fingers. When focusing and using a classic Porro I tend to rest my finger on the axis of the bridge, and withouth noticing I've actually rotated this black metal sleeve making the serial number appear on the front of the axis and not on the back as it originally was.
The glass on the eyepieces of the SkyRover is wider than that on the EII, however the coatings seem to reflect more light (I honestly don't know wether this is actually relevant or not). This is also the case on the objective lenses. Above Kowa, in the centre SkyRover, below EII.
The glasses on the EII seem to reflect less light. Also, when looking inside the tubes of the SkyRover you can see that the finish is not as refined, materials are cut more "raw/rough" and show irregular borders, not polished and refined.
The view through the SkyRovers is very nice, full of contrast, maybe a little more than the EII, colour balance seems also alright. CA is really well controlled, I'd say better than the EII and the Kowa, even though neither has a poor performance in this area. Despinte not wearing glasses, I can't see the entire FOV of the EII (this happens also with other wide angle binoculars, especially Porros, where I can't see the field stop using a natural viewing position). I reckon I get to see around 8,5º of the 8,8º, so the difference in FOV between what I can see in the EII and the SkyRover is hardly noticeable.
BUT... now comes the underwhelming bit. The moment I've started using the SkyRover for a longer while, chasing passerines among branches I've discovered an extremely annoying effect. I'm not fussy about edge performance, neither am I obsessed with super wide fields. These are things I can value (I use both an EII and an ELSV) but I'm not anal about them. However, when the degradation of the image becomes bothersome then we have a problem. I've had this happen with some models. I remember the view through the 7x33 Celestron Granite: it was wide and the centre was very crispy, with a great feeling of depth, but after a while I discovered a really annoying feeling that I was looking at a doughnut of blur that surrounded a sharp centre with a very abrupt transition. Well, here I've experienced something similar. The blurriness becomes simply bothersome, it affects the view. I'm not prone to feeling nauseated by a fuzzy or blurry view, the way some people get somehow dizzy by extreme low distortion (like in the EL), but here it is very annoying because it simply distracts you from what you are looking at.
I'm well aware that taking pictures through the eyepiece of binoculars is often a bad idea if you're trying to represent what your eyes see, but either way I've tried to capture what I see. Here I've looked at an almond tree that has a nest box. I've placed the nest box on the lower end of the FOV and here you can pretty much see what I see (including the blue ring on the field stop in the SkyRover.
EII - SkyRover - YFII
As you can see, the performance of the SkyRover is really poor. The Kowa is only 7,5º, but even if you try to cut out the outer degree of the SkyRover, the view is equally blurry. Again, I'm not bothered by poor edge performance, it's not that, what spoils the view is the way this creeps towards the centre to the point that when following a bird jumping from branch to branch it becomes unbearable.
To see the extent of this, I've tilted ever so slightly the tripod head I was using in order to place the nestbox to about 1/3 to 1/4 inside the FOV.
Again: EII - SkyRover - YFII.
As you can see, even if I've erred on the safe side and the nest box on the image through the SkyRover seems to be the one furthest away from the field stop, it is by far the worse. Again it's quite amazing how well the Kowa performs. In fact, comparing the SkyRover to the Kowa, I'd say that they perform according to price. Yes, the view through the SkyRover seems to be a bit more vibrant and the image seems to display a little more contrast, but the difference is not staggering. The little Kowa holds its places as a great entry-level propostition.
In terms of usability I've basically, encountered something I find unacceptable for the price and aspirations.
But then I've discovered something else... After using the SkyRover some more, I've started to feel some discomfort, probably stemming from the fact that the two tubes provided a distinctly different view. No sooner said than done: I've compared both tubes using the same eye and there is a clear (and I'd say beyond acceptable) difference in performance. All the pictures above have been taken through the right tubes of the binoculars, and it turns out the right tube on the SkyRover is clearly subpar. While the left tube still offers a pretty poor edge performance, it's not as terrible.
Left - Right
As you can see, the image really degrades on the right tube (pay no attention to the colour bias, I have not noticed that when in use, it has probably more to do with the automatic white balance on the camera). You can also see the blue ring on the field stop, that can also be viewed when in use.
So I'm probably dealing with a subpar unit, which does not speak highly of SkyRover quality control. Yes, probably all binoculars have slight discrepancies between the two tubes, even more so at this price point, but I've discovered this because I felt something weird while looking through the binoculars (somehow the same way you can feel a slight eye strain after using slightly out of alignment binoculars for a while).
As a side note, I just can't get over how good both the EII and the Kowa YF are. Yes, I think that in 2023 the EII is overpriced and I don't think I'd buy one for the going prices it has. Yes, the Kowa YF has become pricier, not "around the 100 € mark" anymore, but more like 160 - 170 €, and it's getting some serious competition from the likes of Svbony (although this is not a Porro and still has to prove it can match Kowa in terms of reliability and QC). So, my quest for a binocular that blends the virtues of the EII and the YF still continues... In my dreams I see a Kowa YFII Plus, at around 250 - 300 €, with improved coatings, FOV, focus wheel and construction. Or else an EIII with updated coatings, waterproofness and a quicker focus wheel.
Last edited:
. It really sounds like you had a faulty unit. While my APM 6x30 has some weaknesses, I think it is overall still a very good bino.
