telescopecomparison · 2-way
Astro-Physics 110mm f/6 StarFire GTX vs Borg 107FL
Astro-Physics
110mm f/6 StarFire GTX
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
Borg
107FL
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
Key differences
+10% focal length
Slower by 0.4 f-stops
Specifications
| Specification | Astro-Physics 110mm f/6 StarFire GTX | Borg 107FL |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | refractor |
| Optical design | Apo triplet Super-ED | Apo doublet fluorite |
| Aperture | 110mm | 107mm |
| Focal length | 660mm | 600mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/6.0 | f/5.6 |
| Image circle | 50mm | — |
| Full-frame support | Yes | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 5.5kg | 3.5kg |
Advantages of Astro-Physics 110mm f/6 StarFire GTX
- Larger image circle (50mm) — supports bigger sensors
Advantages of Borg 107FL
- Faster optics at f/5.6 vs f/6
- Lighter (3.5kg vs 5.45kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Astro-Physics 110mm f/6 StarFire GTX
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — Borg 107FL
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Astro-Physics 110mm f/6 StarFire GTX — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 3.13° × 2.08°Scale: 1.18"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.04° × 1.36°Scale: 1.18"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 0.98° × 0.98°Scale: 1.18"/px
Borg 107FL — 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
Astro-Physics 110mm f/6 StarFire GTX — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
Borg 107FL — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
