Comparison Svbony SV47 8x42 vs Svbony SV202 8x42
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 тра 2023
- 00:00:41 Color rendition
00:02:01 Control of the Kidney-bean effect (Blackout)
00:02:50 Size of the eyepieces lens
00:03:11 Sharpness and brightness
00:03:55 Comparison with pictures
Price: I paid 50 euros for the SV47 two years ago and 135 euros for the SV202 a few months ago
Svbony 8x42 SV47 :
Magnification : 8
Objective lens diameter : 42 mm
Field of view : 330 ft @ 1000 yds, or 110 m @ 1000 m
Prism coating : aluminizing
Eye relief : 20.4 mm
Weight : 683.3g/24.10oz [polycarbonate chassis]
Reference :
www.svbony.com/sv47/#F9340A
Svbony 8x42 SV202 :
Magnification : 8
Objective lens diameter : 42 mm
Field of view : 394 ft @ 1000 yds, or 131 m @ 1000 m
Eye relief : 17.5 mm
Weight 720 g [magnesium alloy chassis]
Reference :
www.svbony.com/sv202-8x-binoc...
Budget friendly svbony binoculars for hunting? Id like to get one for my brothers birthday 😊
Thanks a lot for this honest and intersting review.
I will clearly go for the sv202 (i saw your comments on the Neil English's binos review ). As it will be my first good bino, do you advise to start with the 8x42 or 10x42 ?
I will use it mostly on french south west coasts and field for bird waching but also in Amazonia's forest for wild life observation.
I don't have the SV202 10x42 but I have the SV47 10x47 : noticable astigmatism or coma on the edge, the SV47 8x42 is much better to my eyes. So I expect more or less the same thing on the SV202 10x42 in terms of edge to edge sharpness though I know it's not good to extrapolate.
In addition, I would start with the 8x42 for the ease of use. But the 10x42 is lighter (in the SV202 model). In general I always have that feeling that I spend more time to get a sharp image with a 10x42.
@@colvertfurtif finaly took the 10x42 for 97euros, helped me to do a choice ;) i think i'll be happy anyway !
I was hoping you can do a comparison on the Svbony 8x42 vs Nikon Prostuff P7 or Nikon's ED series.
Is ED really make that much of a difference? If the one without ED has superior optics? I'm saying Nikon's non-ED vs Sybony ED.
ED is supposed to reduce chromatic aberrations.
Sometimes, the difference is huge (birds on power lines, birds of prey in the sky) sometimes there is no difference (not enough constrat between a bird and its environment to really see chromatic aberrations).
Most of the time, chromatic aberrations are not bothersome to me.
I have the Nikon Monarch HG 10x42 and according to Allbinos reviews the rate of the control of the chromatic aberrations is 6,1/10.
www.allbinos.com/314-binoculars_review-Nikon_Monarch_HG_10x42.html
This afternoon under a sunny day, I targeted an antenna :
It's hard to be objective with only my eyes, but based on the result of Albinos, I would rate the correction of the chromatic aberrations as followed :
-Nikon 7S 10x42 : 5/10
-Svbony SV 202 8x42 : 5,5/10
-Nikon 10x42 Prostaff P7 : 3/10
-Nikon 8x42 Prostaff P7 : 4/10
But I said in a video (P7 10x42 vs 7S in 10x42), the IPD seems to be a key point.
@@colvertfurtif
Thank you so much for reply!
I understand both Nikon and Svbony have flat-field binoculars, but price gets higher and higher for all that. By watching quite a number of review videos, Nikon's image quality (rendering etc) is pleasing to watch. But Svbony's similar specs products cost less than half from Nikon's.
@@colvertfurtif
Thank you so much for your reply! Appreciate that and great help to me on finding my first "serious" binoculars. Still researching.
Have a great day!
sv47 8×42 have long eye relief, is it possible to focus with the naked eye？
On the SV47 : with the nake eye, I leave a small space between the eyecups and my face to avoid the kidney bean effect. There is a distance where I can still see the entire field of view.
On the SV202 : with the nake eye, I can feel the eyecups stuck on my face, and there is no annoying kidney bean effect. Or I can retreat a bit the binoculars and they just touch a little bit my face and I don't see kidney bean effect anymore. If I retreat more, I will not see the entire field of view.
In both cases, I fully extend the eyecups. And with the naked eye, in both cases I can focus thanks to the focus wheel and the diopter ring.
I think the feeling with the contact between the binoculars and the skin depends on the shape of the face and the nose. I have the feeling that I described above with my eyes, my face and my nose. This feeling can be different for you.
thanks a lot!
Can you please say me what different in version 8x42 from version 8x32 SV bony 202?
I will answer next week. What would you like to know precisely?
@@colvertfurtif matizmu?
thank you very much. I would like to know the fundamental difference in the picture at first glance, which immediately catches the eye. Also, what is the field of view, in which binoculars is the picture wider? And also what about chromatism?
@@vladislavgold1793 What I notice at first glance:
- the apparent field of view is bigger on the SV202 8x32.
- the real field of view is also bigger on the paper 409 ft@1000 yds or 136 m @ 1000 m for the SV 202 8x32, and 394 ft@1000yds or 131 m @1000 m for the SV 202 8x42
- to my eyes, no difference about chromatism on the image, in the same challenging condition : slight at the center, medium and high at the edge.
- By placing the roof of a house at the top of the field of view, to my eyes there is the same amount of pincushion distorsion.
- There are color fringes outside the image and a "miror "effect on the 8x42. I don't see this effect on the 8x32.
- With eyescups fully extended and stuck on my face, on the 8x32 I can see easily a kidney-bean effect. There is no annoying kidney bean effect in the same conditions on the 8x42 with my face.
-I have large eye pupils, the eye placement was difficult for me with the 8x32. It took me several weeks or months to find the right IPD (interpupillar distance) and the right position of the diopter ring. As a consequence, I have a more relaxing view with the 8x42 and my eyes seem to see more details with the 8x42. Also, the twilight factor (the level of details that we can see in theory) has to be taken account. An 8x42 has a better twilight factor than an 8x32 in theory.
- To my eyes, more contrast on green and distant objects like trees with the 8x42.
- To my eyes, more blurs on the 8x32 (the field curvature can depend on the accomodation of the eyes) but the wider apparent field of view has to be taken account.
- "Ghost"images appear more often on the 8x32 (for example, when there are houses behind me, I can see one of the houses on the side of the image while looking in front of me)
@@colvertfurtif okay, thank you very much.
what happens 8x32 has a wider picture? How is it, for example, if you compare Swarovski 8x32 and 8x42, then 8x42 has a much wider picture. and here in sv bony it turns out the opposite ...
@@vladislavgold1793 It's the manufactor's choice. Yes, the NL Pure 8x42 has an impressive apparent field of view on the paper.
И какой же в итоге лучше? И скажите,корпус у sv47 и вправду пластиковый?
Considering the price (50 euros), i don't think that the housing of the SV 47 is made of a magnesium alloy or other metal. To me, it means that it's probably a polycarbonate chassis (plastic).
I have my own opinion but it's up to you to decide which one is better according to your taste. I prefer the SV 202 because the field of view is wider (SV 47 8x42 vs SV 202 8x42) and the sharpness is better for distant objects. For example, when I adjusted the binoculars on the first quarter Moon, the lunar craters seemed sharper to me through the SV 202.
@@colvertfurtifпонятно.
Mau Tanya, apakah itu kaca atau akcrilic?
I've no idea
is sv202 worth it for the double the price of sv47?
It's worth it if you want better central sharpness, more neutral image, bigger field of view, more robustness.
по-моему мнению, это не парето-оптимально, цена слишком завышена.
Отношение добавочной полезности к добавочной цене.
Hello