Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

William Optics RedCat 61 vs William Optics GT 102

William Optics RedCat 61
William Optics

RedCat 61

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

William Optics GT 102
William Optics

GT 102

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

Key differences

-57% focal length
-40% aperture
Faster by 2.0 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationWilliam Optics RedCat 61William Optics GT 102
Optics
TypeRefractorrefractor
Optical designPetzval APOApo triplet FPL-53
Aperture61mm102mm
Focal length300mm703mm
Native f/ratiof/4.9f/6.9
Image circle45mm44mm
Full-frame supportYesYes
Physical
Weight2.0kg5.6kg
Advantages of William Optics RedCat 61
  • Wider field — 300mm vs 703mm focal length
  • Faster optics at f/4.9 vs f/6.9
  • Lighter (2kg vs 5.6kg) — easier to travel with
Advantages of William Optics GT 102
  • Tighter framing — 703mm vs 300mm focal length
  • 67% more light-gathering aperture
Best for — William Optics RedCat 61
  • Wide-field nebulae and Milky Way regions
  • Fast imaging — short exposures per sub
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — William Optics GT 102
  • Medium-sized galaxies and planetary nebulae
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
William Optics RedCat 61 — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 6.88° × 4.58°Scale: 2.59"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 4.49° × 3.00°Scale: 2.59"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.16° × 2.16°Scale: 2.59"/px
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 RedCat 61 — recommended user

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

William Optics GT 102 — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives