telescopecomparison · 2-way
Borg 107FL vs SharpStar 94EDPH
Borg
107FL
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
SharpStar
94EDPH
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
Key differences
+16% focal length
+14% aperture
Specifications
| Specification | Borg 107FL | SharpStar 94EDPH |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | refractor |
| Optical design | Apo doublet fluorite | Apo triplet FPL-53 |
| Aperture | 107mm | 94mm |
| Focal length | 600mm | 518mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/5.6 | f/5.5 |
| Image circle | — | 44mm |
| Full-frame support | Yes | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 3.5kg | 4.5kg |
Advantages of Borg 107FL
- Tighter framing — 600mm vs 518mm focal length
- 14% more light-gathering aperture
- Lighter (3.5kg vs 4.5kg) — easier to travel with
Advantages of SharpStar 94EDPH
- Wider field — 518mm vs 600mm focal length
- Larger image circle (44mm) — supports bigger sensors
Best for — Borg 107FL
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — SharpStar 94EDPH
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Borg 107FL — 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
SharpStar 94EDPH — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 3.98° × 2.65°Scale: 1.50"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.60° × 1.74°Scale: 1.50"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.25° × 1.25°Scale: 1.50"/px
Borg 107FL — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
SharpStar 94EDPH — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.