17 replies to this topic

[jukim]

It's interesting that it looks like China and Taiwan will soon clash in a Petzval shootout.

 

The price is similar, although the Cat version is sli~ghtly more expensive.

 

The SQA's performance, as partially posted on CN, looks better than expected, but could the larger version of the Cat stand up to it?

 

The reason I posted this thread is because I want to discuss whether there are significant differences in design between the two barrels.

and what about user convenience?

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

[JimTheEngineer]

SQA106 spot size looks significantly smaller than the UltraCat108 for APS-C and full frame. Not sure if there is more focus room for one over the other for visual or electronic rotator installation.

Edited by JimTheEngineer, 10 January 2025 - 04:21 AM.

[Nikguy]

Obviously, both telescopes are based on the same optical design!

 

For me, this is a new generation of telescopes, as they are suitable for medium format and deliver the smallest RMS (1-2um)!

 

My experience with the SQA55 is very good, as it is suitable for full format without any problems!

 

I'm going to get the SQA106, as my experience so far has been that the quality fluctuations with Askar is less than with WO.

[alexgov]

I am also interested in choosing between these two refractors as a second remote mount. ASKAR seems to be available now. It is also interesting to compare the characteristics of the native focusing units. With a full frame I would not use a rotator - I do not think there will be a strong limitation on framing. I am a little intrigued by the marketing numbers. 106mm from ASKAR sounds like "inexpensive Takahashi", and 108mm from WO sounds like "We compensate the difference with Takahashi by two millimeters"  

[Nikguy]

 

 

[gus6464]

spots.jpg

The graph scale on the askar is twice as large as the WO which makes it quite deceiving.

[JimTheEngineer]

The RMS numbers for SQA are half those of the WO, so the scale is not as important. It is deceiving though…

The graph scale on the askar is twice as large as the WO which makes it quite deceiving.

[charles.tremblay.darveau]

I think both are probably very good. I have the Sqa85 and am very happy with its performance. I have also the fra400, 107phq and sca260 and all telescope are of excellent quality.

[rashii]

Any real comparison? 

[JimTheEngineer]

No - just fake ones…

[Sctom]

If anyone gets the 106, please comment on it. What you like & dislike, camera used, etc. The numbers do look good.

[Darkblade48]

Friend has one, we haven't had enough clear nights for him to do a proper test.

 

He's using an ASI 2600 Duo, Mele 4C with NINA.

 

Likes: Razor sharp stars

Dislikes: Weight

 

Too bad the weather is so cloudy in March

[Sctom]

Very interested in his/her opinion and experience.
I love my Stellarvue SVX90 with the 2600 MC, very easy and forgiving, and would only upgrade for a Takahashi.  But the SQA106 stats seem to be equal to a Tak, from what I’ve seen. I get minimal CA in the edges if I really pixel peep, and that may not be only the scope. The 106  may not have this CA. Also, it is a tiny bit more aperture, a bit faster, and a negligible shorter FL. Overall the scope is about the same size & weight. 
A good Petzval may be a small improvement. This may be the only scope worth considering.
Hope your friend feels it is the best scope he/she has.

Edited by Sctom, 27 March 2025 - 10:45 AM.

[Vince_VdB]

I literally just now put my SQA106 outside and shall have first light. It is however also for me a new scope and even system as I have ASIAIR on my Redcat while this one is done by NINA and a Pegasus Astro Powerbox with a PA focuser and PA rotator.

 

So I can't give any details/feedback just yet but wish me clear skies  

 

https://live.staticf...33a908a6_b.jpg 

 

https://live.staticf...d8d76c310_b.jpg

 

https://live.staticf...d5eaee34f_b.jpg

[TwinPeaks]

How did 1st light go?

 

I literally just now put my SQA106 outside and shall have first light. It is however also for me a new scope and even system as I have ASIAIR on my Redcat while this one is done by NINA and a Pegasus Astro Powerbox with a PA focuser and PA rotator.

 

So I can't give any details/feedback just yet but wish me clear skies

 

https://live.staticf...33a908a6_b.jpg 

 

https://live.staticf...d8d76c310_b.jpg

 

https://live.staticf...d5eaee34f_b.jpg

[Sctom]

What are the rough dimensions of the SQA106 case, and does it have room for a little more stuff? How about a couple pictures of the scope in the case?

I need another scope like I need another hole in the head, but the SQA106 just seems to check all the boxes for me that I’ve been considering for a while now.

I feel a yard sale coming in the classifieds…

[Celerondon]

Obviously, both telescopes are based on the same optical design!

 

For me, this is a new generation of telescopes, as they are suitable for medium format and deliver the smallest RMS (1-2um)!

 

My experience with the SQA55 is very good, as it is suitable for full format without any problems!

 

I'm going to get the SQA106, as my experience so far has been that the quality fluctuations with Askar is less than with WO.

Are they though?  
 

Although many if not most imported telescopes share design and manufacturing features with other brands, there is a fundamental design difference between these two telescopes.  I’m no optical designer but doesn’t the WIFD feature on William Optics telescope imply that it is a different execution of the Petzval concept? 
 

Don

[Nikguy]

Are they though?  
 

Although many if not most imported telescopes share design and manufacturing features with other brands, there is a fundamental design difference between these two telescopes.  I’m no optical designer but doesn’t the WIFD feature on William Optics telescope imply that it is a different execution of the Petzval concept? 
 

Don

For me they are, because the new SQA series is also specified for medium format. I think the new Williams Redcat (108) is too, right?

Medium format would be a new generation with new possibilities. The cameras still cost a lot of money at the moment, but I'm sure they'll be affordable in a few years' time.

 

That means they are definitely suitable for full-frame format and that's what I want to do.

 

And the WFID is independent of the lens design, because it only refers to the focusser.