telescopecomparison · 2-way
Askar 80PHQ vs ZWO FF90 APO
Askar
80PHQ
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
ZWO
FF90 APO
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
Key differences
-11% aperture
Slower by 0.7 f-stops
Specifications
| Specification | Askar 80PHQ | ZWO FF90 APO |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | refractor |
| Optical design | Petzval quintuplet FPL-51 | Apo quadruplet ED |
| Aperture | 80mm | 90mm |
| Focal length | 600mm | 609mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/7.5 | f/6.8 |
| Image circle | 44mm | 44mm |
| Full-frame support | Yes | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 4.5kg | 3.9kg |
Advantages of Askar 80PHQ
Closely matched on the compared specs.
Advantages of ZWO FF90 APO
- 13% more light-gathering aperture
- Faster optics at f/6.8 vs f/7.5
Best for — Askar 80PHQ
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — ZWO FF90 APO
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Askar 80PHQ — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 3.44° × 2.29°Scale: 1.29"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.24° × 1.50°Scale: 1.29"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.08° × 1.08°Scale: 1.29"/px
ZWO FF90 APO — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 3.39° × 2.26°Scale: 1.27"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.21° × 1.48°Scale: 1.27"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.06° × 1.06°Scale: 1.27"/px
Askar 80PHQ — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
ZWO FF90 APO — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
