Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

Celestron RASA 11 vs Takahashi FSQ-130ED

Celestron RASA 11
Celestron

RASA 11

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

Takahashi FSQ-130ED
Takahashi

FSQ-130ED

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

Key differences

+115% aperture
Faster by 2.8 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationCelestron RASA 11Takahashi FSQ-130ED
Optics
Typeastrographrefractor
Optical designRowe-Ackermann Schmidt AstrographPetzval quadruplet
Aperture279mm130mm
Focal length620mm650mm
Native f/ratiof/2.2f/5.0
Image circle43mm88mm
Full-frame supportYesYes
Physical
Weight20.0kg11.0kg
Advantages of Celestron RASA 11
  • 115% more light-gathering aperture
  • Faster optics at f/2.22 vs f/5
Advantages of Takahashi FSQ-130ED
  • Larger image circle (88mm) — supports bigger sensors
  • Lighter (11kg vs 20kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Celestron RASA 11
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
  • Fast imaging — short exposures per sub
  • Faint-object imaging under dark skies
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — Takahashi FSQ-130ED
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
  • Fast imaging — short exposures per sub
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Celestron RASA 11 — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 3.33° × 2.22°Scale: 1.25"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.17° × 1.45°Scale: 1.25"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.04° × 1.04°Scale: 1.25"/px
Takahashi FSQ-130ED — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 3.17° × 2.12°Scale: 1.19"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.07° × 1.38°Scale: 1.19"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.00° × 1.00°Scale: 1.19"/px
Celestron RASA 11 — recommended user

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

Takahashi FSQ-130ED — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives