telescopecomparison · 2-way
SharpStar 140PH vs Borg 107FL
SharpStar
140PH
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
Borg
107FL
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.
Key differences
+63% focal length
+31% aperture
Slower by 1.4 f-stops
Specifications
| Specification | SharpStar 140PH | Borg 107FL |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | refractor |
| Optical design | Apo triplet FPL-53 | Apo doublet fluorite |
| Aperture | 140mm | 107mm |
| Focal length | 980mm | 600mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/7.0 | f/5.6 |
| Image circle | 52mm | — |
| Full-frame support | Yes | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 9.5kg | 3.5kg |
Advantages of SharpStar 140PH
- Tighter framing — 980mm vs 600mm focal length
- 31% more light-gathering aperture
- Larger image circle (52mm) — supports bigger sensors
Advantages of Borg 107FL
- Wider field — 600mm vs 980mm focal length
- Faster optics at f/5.6 vs f/7
- Lighter (3.5kg vs 9.5kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — SharpStar 140PH
- Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — Borg 107FL
- Large emission nebulae and star clusters
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
SharpStar 140PH — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.10° × 1.40°Scale: 0.79"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.37° × 0.92°Scale: 0.79"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 0.66° × 0.66°Scale: 0.79"/px
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 140PH — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
Borg 107FL — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.