Astrophotoguru · Compare

telescopecomparison · 2-way

William Optics Zenithstar 81 II vs Askar 65PHQ

William Optics Zenithstar 81 II
William Optics

Zenithstar 81 II

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

Askar 65PHQ
Askar

65PHQ

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

Key differences

+15% focal length
+25% aperture
Faster by 0.5 f-stops

Specifications

SpecificationWilliam Optics Zenithstar 81 IIAskar 65PHQ
Optics
TyperefractorRefractor
Optical designApo doublet FPL-53Quintuplet Petzval
Aperture81mm65mm
Focal length478mm416mm
Native f/ratiof/5.9f/6.4
Image circle44mm44mm
Full-frame supportYesYes
Physical
Weight3.6kg3.6kg
Advantages of William Optics Zenithstar 81 II
  • Tighter framing — 478mm vs 416mm focal length
  • 25% more light-gathering aperture
  • Faster optics at f/5.9 vs f/6.4
Advantages of Askar 65PHQ
  • Wider field — 416mm vs 478mm focal length
Best for — William Optics Zenithstar 81 II
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
Best for — Askar 65PHQ
  • Large emission nebulae and star clusters
  • Full-frame astro cameras and DSLRs
William Optics Zenithstar 81 II — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 4.32° × 2.88°Scale: 1.62"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 2.82° × 1.88°Scale: 1.62"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.35° × 1.35°Scale: 1.62"/px
Askar 65PHQ — typical FOV & scale
  • With Full-frame (36×24mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 4.96° × 3.31°Scale: 1.86"/px
  • With APS-C (23.5×15.7mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 3.24° × 2.16°Scale: 1.86"/px
  • With IMX533 square (11.3×11.3mm, 3.76µm)
    FOV: 1.56° × 1.56°Scale: 1.86"/px
William Optics Zenithstar 81 II — recommended user

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

Askar 65PHQ — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives