Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

Askar 151PHQ vs Meade Series 6000 130mm ED Triplet

Askar 151PHQ
Askar

151PHQ

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a permanent observatory setup.

Meade Series 6000 130mm ED Triplet
Meade

Series 6000 130mm ED Triplet

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

Key differences

+16% focal length
+16% aperture

Specifications

SpecificationAskar 151PHQMeade Series 6000 130mm ED Triplet
Optics
Typerefractorrefractor
Optical designPetzval quintuplet FPL-51Apo triplet
Aperture151mm130mm
Focal length1057mm910mm
Native f/ratiof/7.0f/7.0
Image circle60mm52mm
Full-frame supportYesYes
Physical
Weight15.5kg7.7kg
Advantages of Askar 151PHQ
  • Tighter framing — 1057mm vs 910mm focal length
  • 16% more light-gathering aperture
  • Larger image circle (60mm) — supports bigger sensors
Advantages of Meade Series 6000 130mm ED Triplet
  • Wider field — 910mm vs 1057mm focal length
  • Lighter (7.7kg vs 15.5kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Askar 151PHQ
  • Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — Meade Series 6000 130mm ED Triplet
  • Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Askar 151PHQ — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.95° × 1.30°Scale: 0.73"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.27° × 0.85°Scale: 0.73"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 0.61° × 0.61°Scale: 0.73"/px
Meade Series 6000 130mm ED Triplet — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.27° × 1.51°Scale: 0.85"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.48° × 0.99°Scale: 0.85"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 0.71° × 0.71°Scale: 0.85"/px
Askar 151PHQ — recommended user

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a permanent observatory setup.

Meade Series 6000 130mm ED Triplet — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives