telescopecomparison · 2-way
Unistellar Equinox 2 vs Borg 90FL
Unistellar
Equinox 2
Best suited for beginners and wide-field enthusiasts running a backyard imaging setup.
Key differences
-10% focal length
+27% aperture
Faster by 1.7 f-stops
Specifications
| Specification | Unistellar Equinox 2 | Borg 90FL |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | smart-telescope | refractor |
| Optical design | Newtonian all-in-one | Apo doublet fluorite |
| Aperture | 114mm | 90mm |
| Focal length | 450mm | 500mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/3.9 | f/5.6 |
| Image circle | — | — |
| Full-frame support | No | No |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 9.0kg | 2.5kg |
Advantages of Unistellar Equinox 2
- 27% more light-gathering aperture
- Faster optics at f/3.9 vs f/5.6
Advantages of Borg 90FL
- Tighter framing — 500mm vs 450mm focal length
- Lighter (2.5kg vs 9kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Unistellar Equinox 2
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Fast imaging — short exposures per sub
Best for — Borg 90FL
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
Unistellar Equinox 2 — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 4.58° × 3.06°Scale: 1.72"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.99° × 2.00°Scale: 1.72"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.44° × 1.44°Scale: 1.72"/px
Borg 90FL — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 4.13° × 2.75°Scale: 1.55"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.69° × 1.80°Scale: 1.55"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.29° × 1.29°Scale: 1.55"/px
Unistellar Equinox 2 — recommended user
Best suited for beginners and wide-field enthusiasts running a backyard imaging setup.
Borg 90FL — recommended user
Best suited for beginners and wide-field enthusiasts running a portable travel rig.
