telescopecomparison · 2-way
Astro-Physics 130mm f/6.3 StarFire GTX vs William Optics FLT 120
Astro-Physics
130mm f/6.3 StarFire GTX
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
William Optics
FLT 120
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
Key differences
+8% aperture
Specifications
| Specification | Astro-Physics 130mm f/6.3 StarFire GTX | William Optics FLT 120 |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | Refractor |
| Optical design | Apo triplet | Triplet APO |
| Aperture | 130mm | 120mm |
| Focal length | 819mm | 780mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/6.3 | f/6.5 |
| Image circle | — | 44mm |
| Full-frame support | Yes | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 8.2kg | 7.7kg |
Advantages of Astro-Physics 130mm f/6.3 StarFire GTX
Closely matched on the compared specs.
Advantages of William Optics FLT 120
- Larger image circle (44mm) — supports bigger sensors
Best for — Astro-Physics 130mm f/6.3 StarFire GTX
- Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — William Optics FLT 120
- Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Astro-Physics 130mm f/6.3 StarFire GTX — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.52° × 1.68°Scale: 0.95"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.64° × 1.10°Scale: 0.95"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 0.79° × 0.79°Scale: 0.95"/px
William Optics FLT 120 — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.64° × 1.76°Scale: 0.99"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.73° × 1.15°Scale: 0.99"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 0.83° × 0.83°Scale: 0.99"/px
Astro-Physics 130mm f/6.3 StarFire GTX — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
William Optics FLT 120 — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
