Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

Askar 130PHQ vs SharpStar 100QII

Askar 130PHQ
Askar

130PHQ

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.

SharpStar 100QII
SharpStar

100QII

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.

Key differences

+82% focal length
+30% aperture
Slower by 2.2 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationAskar 130PHQSharpStar 100QII
Optics
Typerefractorrefractor
Optical designPetzval quintuplet FPL-51Quadruplet astrograph
Aperture130mm100mm
Focal length1000mm550mm
Native f/ratiof/7.7f/5.5
Image circle60mm44mm
Full-frame supportYesYes
Physical
Weight10.2kg5.5kg
Advantages of Askar 130PHQ
  • Tighter framing — 1000mm vs 550mm focal length
  • 30% more light-gathering aperture
  • Larger image circle (60mm) — supports bigger sensors
Advantages of SharpStar 100QII
  • Wider field — 550mm vs 1000mm focal length
  • Faster optics at f/5.5 vs f/7.7
  • Lighter (5.5kg vs 10.2kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Askar 130PHQ
  • Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — SharpStar 100QII
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Askar 130PHQ — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.06° × 1.38°Scale: 0.78"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.35° × 0.90°Scale: 0.78"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 0.65° × 0.65°Scale: 0.78"/px
SharpStar 100QII — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 3.75° × 2.50°Scale: 1.41"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.45° × 1.64°Scale: 1.41"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.18° × 1.18°Scale: 1.41"/px
Askar 130PHQ — recommended user

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.

SharpStar 100QII — recommended user

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.

Recommended alternatives