Svbony SV215 vs Baader Hyperion Zoom with Barlow

[PeterC65]

I've read a lot of positive reports about the Svbony SV215 3-8mm zoom eyepiece and it's crossed my mind to get one for close up lunar and planetary observation, but I already have a Baader Hyperion Zoom which when fitted with its Barlow gives 3.5mm-10.5mm so should do a similar job.

The Baader starts from 3.5mm but I've read that so does the Svbony.

The Baader actual field of view changes with the zoom setting (48-68 degrees) while the Svbony stays the same (56 degrees).

The Baader eye relief is better (16-19mm) than the Svbony (10mm).

According to the Ernest Eyepiece Review, the Baader suffers much less from field curvature than the Svbony.

When fitted with its Barlow, the Baader is a bit of a handful whereas the Svbony seems perfectly formed.

Has anyone compared the Svbony SV215 with the Baader Hyperion Zoom fitted with its Barlow?

 

[Louis D]

I've compared the SV215 to the Speers-Waler 5-8mm, and the latter wins on AFOV and eye relief.  The former wins on near perfect parfocalness and compactness.  I haven't noticed field curvature in either.

I've photographically measured the SV215's AFOV starting out at 58 degrees at 8mm and widening slightly to 61 degrees at 3.5mm.

If you need the compact solution and parfocalness of the SV215 and can live with its tighter eye relief, then it's an obvious choice.  If you can live with the Barlowed BHZ solution's size, then stick with it.

[John]

I recently owned a Baader Mk IV 8-24 zoom and used it from time to time with the Baader Q-Barlow 2.25x and the Parks Gold 2x barlow (same as an Ultima barlow). I only compared the performance of these combo's a couple of times with the Svbony 3-8 zoom. I recall thinking that the Svbony zoom was marginally better in terms of sharpness and light scatter. For me the Svbony had much more significant advantages over the barlowed Baader zoom in  the areas of compactness, field of view consistency and par-focality across the zoom range. 

I still have the Svbony zoom which I use alongside the Nagler 3-6 and 2-4 zooms as a frequently used eyepiece in all my scopes. I let the Baader zoom go to a new home. 

Edited September 1 by John

[Vanguardian]

On 01/09/2024 at 10:12, John said:

I recently owned a Baader Mk IV 8-24 zoom and used it from time to time with the Baader Q-Barlow 2.25x and the Parks Gold 2x barlow (same as an Ultima barlow). I only compared the performance of these combo's a couple of times with the Svbony 3-8 zoom. I recall thinking that the Svbony zoom was marginally better in terms of sharpness and light scatter. For me the Svbony had much more significant advantages over the barlowed Baader zoom in  the areas of compactness, field of view consistency and par-focality across the zoom range. 

I still have the Svbony zoom which I use alongside the Nagler 3-6 and 2-4 zooms as a frequently used eyepiece in all my scopes. I let the Baader zoom go to a new home. 

New to the forum here, but this is the input I was looking for regarding the Baader. I have done a lot of research and I believe the Baader is good.. but not quite as magnificent as the price tag entails. Thanks! 

[Don Pensack]

14 hours ago, Vanguardian said:

New to the forum here, but this is the input I was looking for regarding the Baader. I have done a lot of research and I believe the Baader is good.. but not quite as magnificent as the price tag entails. Thanks! 

There are better Zooms, like the APM 7.7-15.4mm SuperZoom (constant 66-67°) and the Leica 8.9-17.8mm Aspherical Zoom (57-78°), but they are never optimized for their best optical quality at all focal lengths.

The jury is still out on the new Svbony 8-20mm zoom.

 

One thing about zooms that keeps me from being attracted to them, other than the narrow AFOV issue, is that I really don't need the in-between magnifications.

If I have an eyepiece that yields 150x, and another that yields 185x, when I change from the 150x to the 185x, that is just fine.  The change in field size, magnification, and brightness is about the minimum I need when changing from one eyepiece to the other.

I can even put up with 150x to 200x without constantly feeling like I need a magnification in between.  For me, zooms have too many possible magnifications.

For the year or so I had the Baader zoom, the click points of 8-12-16-20-24 were just fine.  If it had simply blacked out in between the set points, I'd have been fine with that.

That being said, obviously fixed focal length eyepieces were the best solution for me, even though that meant a heavy case with a lot of eyepieces and a lot more money.

 

I'd be seriously tempted with a 4.5-13.5mm constant 80° zoom eyepiece with the quality of Baader Morpheus eyepieces, but I don't think I'm ever going to see that because of how zooms are made.

[bosun21]

1 hour ago, Don Pensack said:

There are better Zooms, like the APM 7.7-15.4mm SuperZoom (constant 66-67°) and the Leica 8.9-17.8mm Aspherical Zoom (57-78°), but they are never optimized for their best optical quality at all focal lengths.

The jury is still out on the new Svbony 8-20mm zoom.

 

One thing about zooms that keeps me from being attracted to them, other than the narrow AFOV issue, is that I really don't need the in-between magnifications.

If I have an eyepiece that yields 150x, and another that yields 185x, when I change from the 150x to the 185x, that is just fine.  The change in field size, magnification, and brightness is about the minimum I need when changing from one eyepiece to the other.

I can even put up with 150x to 200x without constantly feeling like I need a magnification in between.  For me, zooms have too many possible magnifications.

For the year or so I had the Baader zoom, the click points of 8-12-16-20-24 were just fine.  If it had simply blacked out in between the set points, I'd have been fine with that.

That being said, obviously fixed focal length eyepieces were the best solution for me, even though that meant a heavy case with a lot of eyepieces and a lot more money.

 

I'd be seriously tempted with a 4.5-13.5mm constant 80° zoom eyepiece with the quality of Baader Morpheus eyepieces, but I don't think I'm ever going to see that because of how zooms are made.

Please drop me a message Don should you ever discover such a zoom that you described. I also can't really get into zoom eyepieces and it's not for a want of trying. In saying that I have just ordered another Svbony 3-8mm zoom. I owned one previously but sold it due to the short eye relief. I will give it serious go this time particularly on the planets.

[John]

I didn't used to use zooms in the past and have fixed focal length eyepieces covering a pretty full range of useful magnifications with my scopes. 

Over the past few years though I've found that zooms, originally bought under the outreach / travel excuse, have crept into use in my more regular observing as well. They have their compromises but the ability to almost instantly "explore" the impact of alternative image scales on a target is often useful to have.

Two of my zooms are the Nagler short focal length ones though and IMHO they keep pace very well with excellent fixed focal length high power eyepieces - the compromises with these are very slight indeed, but with a correspondingly high price tag 🙄

I still feel that the Svbony 3-8mm zoom is an excellent buy - setting aside the different focal length range, it seems to sit between the Baader 8-24 zoom and the APM "super zoom" in performance terms, more towards the latter than the former.

NB: in the past I have owned the Nagler 3-6mm zoom twice and didn't get on with it too well so sold them on. I now like it very much - shows how our tastes can change with time !

 

Edited 23 hours ago by John

[bosun21]

21 minutes ago, John said:

NB: in the past I have owned the Nagler 3-6mm zoom twice and didn't get on with it too well so sold them on. I now like it very much - shows how our tastes can change with time !

In all honesty this will be my third attempt with the Svbony 3-8mm zoom. I also moved the previous two on. Third time lucky 🤞.

[Ratlet]

2 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

There are better Zooms, like the APM 7.7-15.4mm SuperZoom (constant 66-67°) and the Leica 8.9-17.8mm Aspherical Zoom (57-78°), but they are never optimized for their best optical quality at all focal lengths.

The jury is still out on the new Svbony 8-20mm zoom.

 

One thing about zooms that keeps me from being attracted to them, other than the narrow AFOV issue, is that I really don't need the in-between magnifications.

If I have an eyepiece that yields 150x, and another that yields 185x, when I change from the 150x to the 185x, that is just fine.  The change in field size, magnification, and brightness is about the minimum I need when changing from one eyepiece to the other.

I can even put up with 150x to 200x without constantly feeling like I need a magnification in between.  For me, zooms have too many possible magnifications.

For the year or so I had the Baader zoom, the click points of 8-12-16-20-24 were just fine.  If it had simply blacked out in between the set points, I'd have been fine with that.

That being said, obviously fixed focal length eyepieces were the best solution for me, even though that meant a heavy case with a lot of eyepieces and a lot more money.

 

I'd be seriously tempted with a 4.5-13.5mm constant 80° zoom eyepiece with the quality of Baader Morpheus eyepieces, but I don't think I'm ever going to see that because of how zooms are made.

I actually agree with most of what you've said about zooms.  I don't get on with the ones I've tried for a variety of reasons, although I've mostly been restricted to the cheaper end.

What I like about the svbony one is that I never stump out.  I drop it in the eyepiece and adjust the power to the seeing.  Ive not had exceptional seeing that often but the first time I didnt have the power that it could support.

With the svbony I just dial it in and miss nothing.  I'm lucky enough that I can mostly ignore the imperfections, though I love in fear of them becoming more apparent.  Last eyepiece I started to notice issues with I stopped using in short order and upgrading from the zoom at so many focal lengths would be very expensive.

[Ratlet]

26 minutes ago, bosun21 said:

In all honesty this will be my third attempt with the Svbony 3-8mm zoom. I also moved the previous two on. Third time lucky 🤞.

I can absolutely see why people don't get on with it.  The eye relief is incredibly tight and it can be (when cold I find) and absolute mare to turn would be two complaints I have.  I find it to be less than ideal for DSO for this reason and have used it precisely once on anything other than the moon and planets.  My BST 8mm does a much better and brighter job on these.

[John]

18 minutes ago, Ratlet said:

I can absolutely see why people don't get on with it.  The eye relief is incredibly tight and it can be (when cold I find) and absolute mare to turn would be two complaints I have.  I find it to be less than ideal for DSO for this reason and have used it precisely once on anything other than the moon and planets.  My BST 8mm does a much better and brighter job on these.

I suppose the eye relief of the Svbony zoom could be considered "tight" but I'm used to the 10mm of the Nagler zooms so find it fine.

Plossls and orthos have eye relief that is just 75%-80% of their focal length so around 3mm for a 4mm ortho - now that is tight ! Tiny eye lens to find in the dark as well !

I'm not a glasses wearer when observing otherwise I'd have to stick with my Pentax XW's or use Delites or Delos for shorter FL's.

I have used the Svbony zoom on small DSO's such as planetary nebulae and tight globular clusters and it seems to do OK to my eye. It's not going to suit everybody though, that's for sure !

 

[inedible_hulk]

I only use the Baader when I’m away from home and can’t take my fixed focal length eyepieces with me. It’s just not as good and I’ve always been disappointed with it. I always feel it should be better than it is.

I use the SvBony in the same circumstances and I am always happy with it. At home I will use it to help me select the best fixed eyepiece for that target at that time, but the gain is often small. It’s a fabulous eyepiece for the price and I’ve had no problems with the eye relief.

[paulastro]

The 3-8mm SVBony is a better quality optic for higher powers than the Baader 8-24mm zoom in my view, whether the latter is barlowed or not. 

I have a Mk111 Baader. I think it is complimentary to the SVBony and I use them for different things.  

I usually use the Baader for deep sky if I don't need a particularly wide view.  So it's usually used  from 8 to 20 mm.  It saves my keep changing eyepieces when viewing targets of various size.   

SometimesI will just use my Morpheus 17.5 for a deep sky session depending on the targets.

I don't use the 24 mm setting of the Baader as the narrower field does wrankle a little and I have an ES 24/68  anyway.  

Having said that, I like the Mk111 and it performs well for what I use it for.

These comments apply when using  my 8inch Dob, it's a bit different when using my refractors.

 

[Mr Spock]

Zooms like the Svbony 3-8 are really useful if you have more than one scope. For example, on planetary, with my 100mm the 4mm and 3mm (4.4 and 3.5 actual) would be perfect, whereas with the 12" the 8, 7 and 6 would be just right. 

[RT65CB-SWL]

Just had a look at Star Hop Pro by fellow SGL’er @Kevdog and looking at my C6/SCT and ETX-105 at 3mm for my TeleVue 3-6mm and Svbony 3–8mm zoom e/p’s, I am getting 500x… at 6mm, I am getting 250x… wow… yikes! 

[Louis D]

8 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

One thing about zooms that keeps me from being attracted to them, other than the narrow AFOV issue, is that I really don't need the in-between magnifications.

If I have an eyepiece that yields 150x, and another that yields 185x, when I change from the 150x to the 185x, that is just fine.  The change in field size, magnification, and brightness is about the minimum I need when changing from one eyepiece to the other.

I can even put up with 150x to 200x without constantly feeling like I need a magnification in between.  For me, zooms have too many possible magnifications.

I could probably live with a quality 2" turret with a 40mm SWA, 12mm to 17mm main eyepiece (ES-92 maybe?), 8mm to 11mm mid-high power eyepiece (10mm Delos or 9mm Morpheus?), and a 4mm to 7mm high power eyepiece (5.2mm Pentax XL?).  The problem with turrets is that they are incompatible with Newts.