telescopecomparison · 2-way
Celestron RASA 6 vs William Optics RedCat 71 WIFD
William Optics
RedCat 71 WIFD
Best suited for beginners and wide-field enthusiasts running a portable travel rig.
Key differences
+114% aperture
Faster by 2.7 f-stops
Specifications
| Specification | Celestron RASA 6 | William Optics RedCat 71 WIFD |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | astrograph | Refractor |
| Optical design | Rowe-Ackermann Schmidt Astrograph | Petzval APO |
| Aperture | 152mm | 71mm |
| Focal length | 335mm | 350mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/2.2 | f/4.9 |
| Image circle | 16mm | 45mm |
| Full-frame support | No | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 3.8kg | 2.7kg |
Advantages of Celestron RASA 6
- 114% more light-gathering aperture
- Faster optics at f/2.2 vs f/4.9
Advantages of William Optics RedCat 71 WIFD
- Larger image circle (45mm) — supports bigger sensors
- Lighter (2.7kg vs 3.8kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Celestron RASA 6
- Wide-field nebulae and Milky Way regions
- Fast imaging — short exposures per sub
Best for — William Optics RedCat 71 WIFD
- Wide-field nebulae and Milky Way regions
- Fast imaging — short exposures per sub
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Celestron RASA 6 — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 6.16° × 4.11°Scale: 2.32"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 4.02° × 2.69°Scale: 2.32"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.93° × 1.93°Scale: 2.32"/px
William Optics RedCat 71 WIFD — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 5.89° × 3.93°Scale: 2.22"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 3.85° × 2.57°Scale: 2.22"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.85° × 1.85°Scale: 2.22"/px
Celestron RASA 6 — recommended user
Best suited for beginners and wide-field enthusiasts running a portable travel rig.
William Optics RedCat 71 WIFD — recommended user
Best suited for beginners and wide-field enthusiasts running a portable travel rig.
