Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

William Optics FLT 132 vs Takahashi FSQ-106EDX4

William Optics FLT 132
William Optics

FLT 132

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.

Takahashi FSQ-106EDX4
Takahashi

FSQ-106EDX4

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.

Key differences

+75% focal length
+25% aperture
Slower by 2.0 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationWilliam Optics FLT 132Takahashi FSQ-106EDX4
Optics
TyperefractorRefractor
Optical designApo triplet FPL-53Petzval APO
Aperture132mm106mm
Focal length925mm530mm
Native f/ratiof/7.0f/5.0
Image circle52mm88mm
Full-frame supportYesYes
Physical
Weight7.9kg7.5kg
Advantages of William Optics FLT 132
  • Tighter framing — 925mm vs 530mm focal length
  • 25% more light-gathering aperture
Advantages of Takahashi FSQ-106EDX4
  • Wider field — 530mm vs 925mm focal length
  • Faster optics at f/5 vs f/7
  • Larger image circle (88mm) — supports bigger sensors
Best for — William Optics FLT 132
  • Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — Takahashi FSQ-106EDX4
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
  • Fast imaging — short exposures per sub
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
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
Takahashi FSQ-106EDX4 — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 3.89° × 2.59°Scale: 1.46"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.54° × 1.70°Scale: 1.46"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.22° × 1.22°Scale: 1.46"/px
William Optics FLT 132 — recommended user

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.

Takahashi FSQ-106EDX4 — recommended user

Best suited for intermediate imagers building a versatile kit running a backyard imaging setup.

Recommended alternatives