15 replies to this topic

[Nickyb65]

Hi

 

I was going to by a Vaonis scope but the price was too high for me. So looking at the S50 or the D3.

 

What I like about the D3 is the wider field of view, plus it seems to have a more updated sensor with less noise maybe?

 

Then again I like the S50 with the bigger glass. Both apps to me (on YT videos at least) seem pretty similar.

 

I'm leaning towards the S50 only because of the bigger glass ( I'm into terrestrial photography) and glass/optics always wins over sensors.

 

Some folks say buy both, but at the moment I cannot justify two..wished I could!

 

Anyway, would like to hear from owners on what they think. Does image quality really suffer (SNR noise for example) on the S50 as it uses an older sensor compared

to the D3?

 

Thanks for any guidance,

 

Nick

Edited by Nickyb65, 22 June 2025 - 10:25 AM.

[rkaufmann87]

There are numerous comparisons and "shoot outs" comparing the two telescopes. Some are found in these forums and if you look on Youtube.com and can find video comparisons. I would recommend reviewing several if you have not already as there are quite a few resources available. 

 

You are correct, both have good points so really it comes down to assessing what   your needs are and then deciding which one best fit those needs. Personally I have the S50 and I have not used the D3 so my point of view is skewed. However a couple of things I really like about the S50 is the app which is very easy to learn and use and all of the available resources for the Seestar series to learn how to use it and how to get the most out of it.

[CraigR]

Hi

 

I was going to by a Vaonis scope but the price was too high for me. So looking at the S50 or the D3.

 

What I like about the D3 is the wider field of view, plus it seems to have a more updated sensor with less noise maybe?

 

Then again I like the S50 with the bigger glass. Both apps to me (on YT videos at least) seem pretty similar.

 

I'm leaning towards the S50 only because of the bigger glass ( I'm into terrestrial photography) and glass/optics always wins over sensors.

 

Some folks say buy both, but at the moment I cannot justify two..wished I could!

 

Anyway, would like to hear from owners on what they think. Does image quality really suffer (SNR noise for example) on the S50 as it uses an older sensor compared

to the D3?

 

Thanks for any guidance,

 

Nick

The Seestar S50 is f/5; the Dwarf 3 is f/4.3. So the Dwarf 3 is a little faster even though the aperture (35mm) is a little smaller.. 

 

The Dwarf 3 covers over 5x the area for its default field of view, but its pixels are bigger. Each pixel on the Seestar is 2.39 arcseconds, while on the Dwarf 3 they're 2.75. That's not much of a difference, but it suggests the S50 might do better on smaller objects.

 

I'm told the Seestar software is better/friendlier, but I don't have direct experience with DwarfLabs software.

 

Price is similar.

 

The Dwarf 3 is smaller and more portable, though the S50 is very portable even if it's a little bigger.

 

Both have active user communities but the Seestar is more popular, especially for those who are serious about astrophotography (on a budget). As a clear example, there are currently about 20 Seestars remotely hosted at Starfront Observatories, while I'm not aware of any Dwarf 2/3 owners there.

[Hissing Sid]

As already stated the Seestar is the more popular by far and this usually translates into better support from both the parent company and the expansive user base so if you have issues or need advice after purchase you already have a large support network more or less built in.  
 

Plus if you ever upgrade and want to sell the old version you’ll potentially have a wider group of peeps to sell it to due to its popularity.  

 

Obviously these things are quite apart from other considerations such as hardware capability and specs but if the two options are more or less already equal in your mind and you aren’t looking for a specific spec or feature only found on one of the devices I’d take the above into account.  
 

Personally, I’m waiting for the Pro versions. Best of luck in your choice.  

Edited by Hissing Sid, 23 June 2025 - 09:13 AM.

[BrickInTheSky]

Dwarf 3 has a much larger FOV (that can be matched by S50 in mosaic mode but mosaic mode takes significantly longer to image anything). But Dwarf 3 has slightly worst pixel resolution (not great for small targets). The rest of the features are somewhat comparable. Resell value of both scopes will probably be quite low: they will depreciate fast and given initial price of 500 will not sell for much. There is also a Vespera 2 that has does not suffer from above mentioned issues (good pixel resolution, large FOV, bigger sensor, etc) but it coats 3-4 times than D3 or S50. Resell value will also be quite small imho. I had personally picked V2: nicely made in France, so far it worked flawlessly (scope and the app), it looks great, easy to use app, solid image quality. When a new Vespera comes out (not Pro, Pro did not do it for me this time) I will probably get it and give V2 to my grandkid. He is getting to the age that he can stay late and operate it.

[Dale Smith]

FWIW I own both the S50 and the D3 (and the S30). If I could have only one, it would be the S50. Larger aperture, and more user friendly software IMHO. The S50 goes deeper and the image scale is of course larger.

[sevenofnine]

This video by Cuiv, "The Lazy Geek" might help you decide:...  Good luck!

 

https://www.youtube....qaWP9ZiVk&t=39s

Edited by sevenofnine, 23 June 2025 - 03:57 PM.

[Jenny112]

FWIW I own both the S50 and the D3 (and the S30). If I could have only one, it would be the S50. Larger aperture, and more user friendly software IMHO. The S50 goes deeper and the image scale is of course larger.

The S50 has a larger image size and a better image ratio, making it easier and more comfortable to use

[Jenny112]

The Seestar S50 is f/5; the Dwarf 3 is f/4.3. So the Dwarf 3 is a little faster even though the aperture (35mm) is a little smaller.. 

 

The Dwarf 3 covers over 5x the area for its default field of view, but its pixels are bigger. Each pixel on the Seestar is 2.39 arcseconds, while on the Dwarf 3 they're 2.75. That's not much of a difference, but it suggests the S50 might do better on smaller objects.

 

I'm told the Seestar software is better/friendlier, but I don't have direct experience with DwarfLabs software.

 

Price is similar.

 

The Dwarf 3 is smaller and more portable, though the S50 is very portable even if it's a little bigger.

 

Both have active user communities but the Seestar is more popular, especially for those who are serious about astrophotography (on a budget). As a clear example, there are currently about 20 Seestars remotely hosted at Starfront Observatories, while I'm not aware of any Dwarf 2/3 owners there.

The D3 has a newer sensor, better noise control, and a wider field of view; but I personally prefer the S50 because its large screen is more intuitive and its aperture is larger, which is very advantageous for shooting ground landscapes

[Pegasus55]

 

I own both - pros and cons to each. Software my preference is the S50 app - primarily due to the line of trees to my  E&W the Seestar is easier to pick what objects will be in my field of view or high enough ~70 degrees to clear the trees. both do terrestrial but dwarf will track if you're into that. FOV is factor here's a reference using Orion showing non mosaic mode, You cant go wrong with either. Good luck and clear skies.

[Regulus 1.36]

I own both telescopes; however, if I had to choose just one, I would select the S50.

 

Both smart telescopes can operate in alt-azimuth and equatorial modes. The Dwarf telescope offers a wider native field of view, while the S50 can achieve a similar view in mosaic mode, although this requires a little more time. Astrophotography is a time-consuming hobby, so time shouldn't be a concern if you plan to pursue it. Both telescopes have scheduling features and can operate automatically once set up. This allows you to collect data for later analysis without being actively involved until it’s time to process the images on your laptop.

 

Electronically assisted astronomy (EAA) involves viewing objects as they appear on your smart device while gathering data. The S50's narrower native field of view allows for more detailed observations of planetary nebulae, smaller galaxies, and star clusters. 

 

Additionally, the S50 offers more intuitive software than the Dwarf model, which requires a basic understanding of photography and more user input. Interestingly, if ZWO were to release a pro model, it would essentially align with my vision for a professional option. 

 

Overall, both telescopes will outperform much larger visual telescopes in terms of what can be viewed from a light-polluted area while enabling you to capture photographs suitable for social media. 

 

Ultimately, it's up to you to determine your Astro needs. 

[former lurker]

I have both the d3 and s50. I like them both but they aren't the same. The d3 has an extra wide field camera which the s50 doesn't have. The s50 comes with a tripod. The d3 has more detailed control software and longer exposures. The s50 has better ai denoising. The d3 has better tracking and much tighter gearing. The d3 can be moved manually, not so the s50. Scenery the d3 does better, the s50 can't focus as close. The d3 is a data pig compared to the s50.

They are both good telescopes but are very different.

[CraigR]

I have both the d3 and s50. I like them both but they aren't the same. The d3 has an extra wide field camera which the s50 doesn't have. The s50 comes with a tripod. The d3 has more detailed control software and longer exposures. The s50 has better ai denoising. The d3 has better tracking and much tighter gearing. The d3 can be moved manually, not so the s50. Scenery the d3 does better, the s50 can't focus as close. The d3 is a data pig compared to the s50.

They are both good telescopes but are very different.

I didn't realize the D3 didn't have a tripod (+$89).

 

When you say the D3 can be moved manually, but the S50 cannot, what kind of movement are you talking about? Just physically turning and pointing it at stuff? The S50 lets you do that in the app but I wouldn't grab the arm and just move it, or rotate it on its base physically. 

[former lurker]

The d3 can be physically turned and pointed at stuff by hand (good for scenery or wildlife) or through the app. If the d3 is moved by hand it needs to be recalibrated for astro. If using the app to move the d3 the slewing speed can be adjusted. The wide field camera can be used as a finder scope. The s50 only has fast or slow slewing speeds. There is no manually grabbing the s50 arm and pointing it. And no wide field camera.

The d3 will work just fine by setting it on any flat surface, no tripod required. The s50 has feet on the bottom which prevent it from turning when just set on a flat surface, tripod required. Neither the d3 nor the s50 will operate in eq mode without an additional wedge. Both have eq mode. The d3 can't tangle an attached USB cord.

I like them both but they are very different.

[geoffl]

I have a D2 (bought first) and an S50 (bought a few weeks later). As has been noted above, they are both good, but different. My D2, in its soft bag, fits in my backpack, my S50, in its hard case, does not. I tend to use my S50 at home, almost exclusively for astro; and my D2 away from home, also for astro, but also for birding. I'm not sure that the improvements from D2 to D3 are quite enough to persuade me to get a D3, but it is tempting.

 

Geoff

[MarcusFin]

Ciao, I’m suffering of instrumentitis and due to this illness I bought also these toys … BTW they are not toys because with different capabilities can help you to dedicate more time to the observation and less to the setup if you don’t have a fixed place for your instrumentation.
I bought recently a D3 (I have also D2) and comparing to Seestar S50 I think it’s easier to setup. This is a must for me because the time (not yet retired ….).
The best I have is the Vaonis Vespera Pro because it’s the perfect device. 30 minutes for setup but then it works till the morning….


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk Pro