telescopecomparison · 2-way
Stellarvue SVX152T vs William Optics FLT 156
Stellarvue
SVX152T
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a permanent observatory setup.
William Optics
FLT 156
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.
Key differences
+11% focal length
Slower by 0.9 f-stops
Specifications
| Specification | Stellarvue SVX152T | William Optics FLT 156 |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Type | refractor | refractor |
| Optical design | Apo triplet | Apo triplet FPL-53 |
| Aperture | 152mm | 156mm |
| Focal length | 1200mm | 1085mm |
| Native f/ratio | f/7.9 | f/7.0 |
| Image circle | 60mm | 52mm |
| Full-frame support | Yes | Yes |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | 14.0kg | 11.5kg |
Advantages of Stellarvue SVX152T
- Tighter framing — 1200mm vs 1085mm focal length
- Larger image circle (60mm) — supports bigger sensors
Advantages of William Optics FLT 156
- Faster optics at f/7 vs f/7.9
- Lighter (11.5kg vs 14kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Stellarvue SVX152T
- Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — William Optics FLT 156
- Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
- Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Stellarvue SVX152T — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.72° × 1.15°Scale: 0.65"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.12° × 0.75°Scale: 0.65"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 0.54° × 0.54°Scale: 0.65"/px
William Optics FLT 156 — typical FOV & scale
- With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.90° × 1.27°Scale: 0.71"/px
- With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 1.24° × 0.83°Scale: 0.71"/px
- With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)FOV: 0.60° × 0.60°Scale: 0.71"/px
Stellarvue SVX152T — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a permanent observatory setup.
William Optics FLT 156 — recommended user
Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.