Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

William Optics GT 102 vs William Optics Zenithstar 61 II

William Optics GT 102
William Optics

GT 102

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

William Optics Zenithstar 61 II
William Optics

Zenithstar 61 II

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

Key differences

+95% focal length
+67% aperture
Slower by 1.0 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationWilliam Optics GT 102William Optics Zenithstar 61 II
Optics
Typerefractorrefractor
Optical designApo triplet FPL-53Apo doublet FPL-53
Aperture102mm61mm
Focal length703mm360mm
Native f/ratiof/6.9f/5.9
Image circle44mm44mm
Full-frame supportYesNo
Physical
Weight5.6kg1.9kg
Advantages of William Optics GT 102
  • Tighter framing — 703mm vs 360mm focal length
  • 67% more light-gathering aperture
Advantages of William Optics Zenithstar 61 II
  • Wider field — 360mm vs 703mm focal length
  • Faster optics at f/5.9 vs f/6.9
  • Lighter (1.9kg vs 5.6kg) — easier to travel with
Best for — William Optics GT 102
  • Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — William Optics Zenithstar 61 II
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
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 Zenithstar 61 II — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 5.73° × 3.82°Scale: 2.15"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 3.74° × 2.50°Scale: 2.15"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.80° × 1.80°Scale: 2.15"/px
William Optics GT 102 — recommended user

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

William Optics Zenithstar 61 II — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives