DWARF 3 vs Seestar S50
The two best-known budget smart telescopes take opposite routes: the DWARF 3 bets on a 4K sensor, the S50 on a 50 mm lens.
Short answer
The DWARF 3 is the better buy today: wider field, more pixels, lighter, and in stock. The S50 still wins on raw aperture if you find one cheap. The fair modern rival to the DWARF 3 is the Seestar S30 Pro.
Key differences
- Aperture: 50 mm vs 35 mm, so the S50 collects 2× the light per exposure.
- Sensor: 8.3 MP IMX678 with 2.0 µm pixels vs 2.1 MP IMX462 with 2.9 µm pixels. Image scale ends up similar (2.75″ vs 2.39″ per pixel), but the DWARF 3 frame is 2.93° × 1.65° vs 1.29° × 0.73°.
- Filters: DWARF 3 has VIS, astro and dual-narrowband inside; the S50 has UV/IR-cut, duo-band and dark.
- Weight: 1.3 kg vs 2.5 kg. The S50 includes a tripod; the DWARF 3 does not.
- EQ mode: both. DWARF 3 works with any sturdy tripod or wedge.
Specs side by side
| DWARF 3 | S50 | |
|---|---|---|
| List price | $599 | $499 |
| Aperture | 35 mm | 50 mm |
| Focal length | 150 mm | 250 mm |
| Focal ratio | f/4.3 | f/5 |
| Sensor | Sony IMX678 STARVIS 2 | Sony IMX462 |
| Resolution | 8.3 MP | 2.1 MP |
| Field of view | 2.93° × 1.65° | 1.29° × 0.73° |
| Image scale | 2.75″/px | 2.39″/px |
| Wide-angle camera | Wide-angle camera, 45 mm equivalent (2 MP) | No |
| Weight | 1.3 kg | 2.5 kg |
| Battery | 5.5 h | 6 h |
| Storage | 128 GB | 64 GB |
| EQ mode | Yes (in-app polar alignment; up to 60 s telephoto subs) | Yes (TC20 tripod recommended) |
| Filters | Built-in VIS, astro and dual-narrowband filters; magnetic solar filters included | UV/IR-cut, duo-band (OIII 30 nm / Hα 20 nm), dark filter; magnetic solar filter included |
| Tripod included | No | Yes |
| Eyepiece | No | No |
Highlighted cells are better on that line (price, focal ratio, image scale and weight: lower is better). Field of view is compared by area; whether wider is better depends on your targets.
Field of view to scale
Gold solid frame: DWARF 3. Teal dashed frame: S50.
DWARF 3 · S50
| Object | DWARF 3 | S50 |
|---|---|---|
| Full Moon | Fits (18% of the frame width) | Fits (40% of the frame width) |
| Andromeda Galaxy (M31) | Needs a mosaic (about 2 frames) | Needs a mosaic (about 3×2 frames) |
| Orion Nebula (M42) | Fits (38% of the frame width) | Needs a mosaic (about 2×2 frames) |
| Pleiades (M45) | Needs a mosaic (about 2 frames) | Needs a mosaic (about 2×3 frames) |
| North America Nebula | Needs a mosaic (about 2 frames) | Needs a mosaic (about 2×3 frames) |
| Whirlpool Galaxy (M51) | Fits, but small: about 236 px across | Fits (14% of the frame width) |
| Ring Nebula (M57) | Fits, but small: about 30 px across | Fits, but small: about 35 px across |
| Jupiter | Fits, but small: about 16 px across | Fits, but small: about 19 px across |
Numbers in charts
Full reviews
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, the DWARF 3 or the Seestar S50?
The DWARF 3 is the better buy today: wider field, more pixels, lighter, and in stock. The S50 still wins on raw aperture if you find one cheap. The fair modern rival to the DWARF 3 is the Seestar S30 Pro.
Which has the wider field of view?
DWARF 3: 2.93° × 1.65°. Seestar S50: 1.29° × 0.73°.
Which gathers more light?
Seestar S50 (50 mm vs 35 mm aperture, 2.0× the collecting area).
More comparisons
Sources
- dwarflab.com/products/dwarf-3-smart-telescope
- dwarflab.com/us/pages/astronomy-with-dwarf-3-smart-telescope
- help.dwarflab.com/docs/DWARF-3-Unboxing-and-Quick-Setup
- www.seestar.com/products/seestar-s50
Specs and prices checked on 11 Nov 2026.