Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

Celestron C6 SCT vs Askar FRA600

Celestron C6 SCT
Celestron

C6 SCT

Best suited for experienced imagers chasing detail running a portable travel rig.

Askar FRA600
Askar

FRA600

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

Key differences

+150% focal length
+39% aperture
Slower by 4.4 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationCelestron C6 SCTAskar FRA600
Optics
TypesctRefractor
Optical designSchmidt-CassegrainPetzval Quintuplet APO
Aperture150mm108mm
Focal length1500mm600mm
Native f/ratiof/10.0f/5.6
Image circle60mm
Full-frame supportNoYes
Physical
Weight4.5kg7.8kg
Advantages of Celestron C6 SCT
  • Tighter framing — 1500mm vs 600mm focal length
  • 39% more light-gathering aperture
  • Lighter (4.5kg vs 7.8kg) — easier to travel with
Advantages of Askar FRA600
  • Wider field — 600mm vs 1500mm focal length
  • Faster optics at f/5.6 vs f/10
  • Larger image circle (60mm) — supports bigger sensors
Best for — Celestron C6 SCT
  • Small galaxies, planetary nebulae, lunar & planetary detail
  • High-resolution long-exposure work
Best for — Askar FRA600
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Celestron C6 SCT — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.38° × 0.92°Scale: 0.52"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 0.90° × 0.60°Scale: 0.52"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 0.43° × 0.43°Scale: 0.52"/px
Askar FRA600 — 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
Celestron C6 SCT — recommended user

Best suited for experienced imagers chasing detail running a portable travel rig.

Askar FRA600 — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives