Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

William Optics FLT 156 vs William Optics FLT 132

William Optics FLT 156
William Optics

FLT 156

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

William Optics FLT 132
William Optics

FLT 132

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

Key differences

+17% focal length
+18% aperture

Specifications

SpecificationWilliam Optics FLT 156William Optics FLT 132
Optics
Typerefractorrefractor
Optical designApo triplet FPL-53Apo triplet FPL-53
Aperture156mm132mm
Focal length1085mm925mm
Native f/ratiof/7.0f/7.0
Image circle52mm52mm
Full-frame supportYesYes
Physical
Weight11.5kg7.9kg
Advantages of William Optics FLT 156
  • Tighter framing — 1085mm vs 925mm focal length
  • 18% more light-gathering aperture
Advantages of William Optics FLT 132
  • Wider field — 925mm vs 1085mm focal length
  • Lighter (7.9kg vs 11.5kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — William Optics FLT 156
  • 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
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
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
William Optics FLT 156 — 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.

Recommended alternatives