Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

William Optics GT 102 vs William Optics FLT 156

William Optics GT 102
William Optics

GT 102

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

William Optics FLT 156
William Optics

FLT 156

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

Key differences

-35% focal length
-35% aperture

Specifications

SpecificationWilliam Optics GT 102William Optics FLT 156
Optics
Typerefractorrefractor
Optical designApo triplet FPL-53Apo triplet FPL-53
Aperture102mm156mm
Focal length703mm1085mm
Native f/ratiof/6.9f/7.0
Image circle44mm52mm
Full-frame supportYesYes
Physical
Weight5.6kg11.5kg
Advantages of William Optics GT 102
  • Wider field — 703mm vs 1085mm focal length
  • Lighter (5.6kg vs 11.5kg) — easier to travel with
Advantages of William Optics FLT 156
  • Tighter framing — 1085mm vs 703mm focal length
  • 53% more light-gathering aperture
  • Larger image circle (52mm) — supports bigger sensors
Best for — William Optics GT 102
  • 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
William Optics GT 102 — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.93° × 1.96°Scale: 1.10"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.92° × 1.28°Scale: 1.10"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 0.92° × 0.92°Scale: 1.10"/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
William Optics GT 102 — recommended user

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

William Optics FLT 156 — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives