Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

Takahashi FSQ-85EDX vs Takahashi FC-100DL

Takahashi FSQ-85EDX
Takahashi

FSQ-85EDX

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

Takahashi FC-100DL
Takahashi

FC-100DL

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

Key differences

-50% focal length
-15% aperture
Faster by 3.7 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationTakahashi FSQ-85EDXTakahashi FC-100DL
Optics
TypeRefractorrefractor
Optical designPetzval APOApo doublet fluorite
Aperture85mm100mm
Focal length450mm900mm
Native f/ratiof/5.3f/9.0
Image circle44mm44mm
Full-frame supportYesNo
Physical
Weight4.0kg3.3kg
Advantages of Takahashi FSQ-85EDX
  • Wider field — 450mm vs 900mm focal length
  • Faster optics at f/5.3 vs f/9
Advantages of Takahashi FC-100DL
  • Tighter framing — 900mm vs 450mm focal length
  • 18% more light-gathering aperture
  • Lighter (3.3kg vs 4kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — Takahashi FSQ-85EDX
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — Takahashi FC-100DL
  • Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
  • High-resolution long-exposure work
Takahashi FSQ-85EDX — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 4.58° × 3.06°Scale: 1.72"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.99° × 2.00°Scale: 1.72"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.44° × 1.44°Scale: 1.72"/px
Takahashi FC-100DL — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.29° × 1.53°Scale: 0.86"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.50° × 1.00°Scale: 0.86"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 0.72° × 0.72°Scale: 0.86"/px
Takahashi FSQ-85EDX — recommended user

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

Takahashi FC-100DL — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives