Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED vs Sky-Watcher Evostar 80ED

Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED
Sky-Watcher

Evostar 72ED

Best suited for beginners and wide-field enthusiasts running a portable travel rig.

Sky-Watcher Evostar 80ED
Sky-Watcher

Evostar 80ED

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.

Key differences

-30% focal length
-10% aperture
Faster by 1.7 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationSky-Watcher Evostar 72EDSky-Watcher Evostar 80ED
Optics
Typerefractorrefractor
Optical designApo doublet FPL-53Apo doublet FPL-53
Aperture72mm80mm
Focal length420mm600mm
Native f/ratiof/5.8f/7.5
Image circle44mm44mm
Full-frame supportNoNo
Physical
Weight2.4kg3.8kg
Advantages of Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED
  • Wider field — 420mm vs 600mm focal length
  • Faster optics at f/5.8 vs f/7.5
  • Lighter (2.4kg vs 3.8kg) — easier to travel with
Advantages of Sky-Watcher Evostar 80ED
  • Tighter framing — 600mm vs 420mm focal length
  • 11% more light-gathering aperture
Best for — Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
Best for — Sky-Watcher Evostar 80ED
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 4.91° × 3.27°Scale: 1.85"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 3.21° × 2.14°Scale: 1.85"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.54° × 1.54°Scale: 1.85"/px
Sky-Watcher Evostar 80ED — 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
Sky-Watcher Evostar 72ED — recommended user

Best suited for beginners and wide-field enthusiasts running a portable travel rig.

Sky-Watcher Evostar 80ED — recommended user

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a portable travel rig.

Recommended alternatives