that's what annoys me about the SQA too and that they make you buy the belt kit as an add-on to something that is designed as an astrograph so is almost definitely going to be used with an EAF. It is incredibly sharp though but the Draco comes very close to it for sharpness.
They do both look good by review. Sharpness seems to be a "copy variation" attribute with Chinese made lenses, but the SQA55 at least seems to be well QA'd by number of reports. Also remember that BlurXterminator may do more sharpening for less money in some cases.
I still find it shocking that the redcat star shapes are so bad that WO put in the literature that you have to use BXT with it.
You mean the MiniCat? The raw images that I've seem from RedCats looks okay for most examples, the MiniCat appears to be a disaster comparatively.
yeah, is it just the minicat or the standard 51 too?
As far as I know, just the MiniCat has this issue and it's down to the design. The RedCat/SpaceCat 51 are well known for good quality and QA, hence the popularity. They can be beaten on price if you want to roll the dice on QA, but otherwise are very good for the money.
Cloudy nights is a good forum to look for people posting output from Pixinsight's aberration inspector. Lots of RedCats and SQA55s, but I haven't spotted any posts of FO's Draco 62 corners.
They are a newish Taiwanese company. Nico Carver reviewed it and it performed well against his Tak.Cuiv had a preproduction model and apart from pinched optics it looked good. It's f3.9 so it's gonna be hard to get ultra sharp but the extra speed might be nice and as you say, BXT can sort the rest.