telescopecomparison · 2-way
SharpStar 140PH vs William Optics FLT 132
SharpStar
140PH
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
William Optics
FLT 132
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
Key differences
+6% focal length
+6% aperture
Specifications
| Specification | SharpStar 140PH | William Optics FLT 132 |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | refractor |
| Optical design | Apo triplet FPL-53 | Apo triplet FPL-53 |
| Aperture | 140mm | 132mm |
| Focal length | 980mm | 925mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/7.0 | f/7.0 |
| Image circle | 52mm | 52mm |
| Full-frame support | Yes | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 9.5kg | 7.9kg |
Advantages of SharpStar 140PH
Closely matched on the compared specs.
Advantages of William Optics FLT 132
- Lighter (7.9kg 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 — William Optics FLT 132
- Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
- 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
William Optics FLT 132 — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 2.23° × 1.49°Scale: 0.84"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.46° × 0.97°Scale: 0.84"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 0.70° × 0.70°Scale: 0.84"/px
SharpStar 140PH — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
William Optics FLT 132 — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.