telescopecomparison · 2-way
Askar 80PHQ vs ZWO FF80 APO
Askar
80PHQ
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
ZWO
FF80 APO
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
Key differences
+7% focal length
Slower by 0.5 f-stops
Specifications
| Specification | Askar 80PHQ | ZWO FF80 APO |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | refractor |
| Optical design | Petzval quintuplet FPL-51 | Apo doublet FCD-100 |
| Aperture | 80mm | 80mm |
| Focal length | 600mm | 560mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/7.5 | f/7.0 |
| Image circle | 44mm | 44mm |
| Full-frame support | Yes | No |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 4.5kg | 4.0kg |
Advantages of Askar 80PHQ
Closely matched on the compared specs.
Advantages of ZWO FF80 APO
- Faster optics at f/7 vs f/7.5
Best for — Askar 80PHQ
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — ZWO FF80 APO
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
Askar 80PHQ — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 3.44° × 2.29°Scale: 1.29"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.24° × 1.50°Scale: 1.29"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.08° × 1.08°Scale: 1.29"/px
ZWO FF80 APO — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 3.68° × 2.46°Scale: 1.38"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.40° × 1.61°Scale: 1.38"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.16° × 1.16°Scale: 1.38"/px
Askar 80PHQ — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
ZWO FF80 APO — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.