telescopecomparison · 2-way
Askar SQA106 vs ZWO FF80 APO
Askar
SQA106
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
ZWO
FF80 APO
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
Key differences
+33% aperture
Faster by 1.5 f-stops
Specifications
| Specification | Askar SQA106 | ZWO FF80 APO |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | refractor |
| Optical design | Quadruplet astrograph FPL-51 | Apo doublet FCD-100 |
| Aperture | 106mm | 80mm |
| Focal length | 580mm | 560mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/5.5 | f/7.0 |
| Image circle | 60mm | 44mm |
| Full-frame support | Yes | No |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 6.5kg | 4.0kg |
Advantages of Askar SQA106
- 33% more light-gathering aperture
- Faster optics at f/5.5 vs f/7
- Larger image circle (60mm) — supports bigger sensors
Advantages of ZWO FF80 APO
- Lighter (4kg vs 6.5kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Askar SQA106
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — ZWO FF80 APO
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
Askar SQA106 — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 3.56° × 2.37°Scale: 1.34"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.32° × 1.55°Scale: 1.34"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.12° × 1.12°Scale: 1.34"/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 SQA106 — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
ZWO FF80 APO — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.