DWARFLAB Draco vs DWARF 3 vs DWARF Mini: Should You Upgrade?

DWARFLAB has opened pre-orders for the new Draco Smart Telescope, and this is a much bigger step up than I expected.

I currently own both the DWARF 3 and DWARF Mini, and I pre-ordered the new Draco SHO shortly after pre-orders opened. Based on the specifications, Draco looks less like a replacement for the DWARF 3 or Mini and more like a move into a higher level of smart telescope.

The major upgrades include a 90mm aperture, larger sensor, exposures up to 300 seconds, built-in guiding, active CMOS cooling, dew prevention, and a rotating sensor for easier composition. Draco also gets a much wider secondary camera.

But it is also much bigger, heavier, and more expensive.

For existing DWARF owners, the real question is whether Draco offers enough improvement to justify the added size, weight, and cost.

Draco Is More Than a Bigger DWARF 3

I don’t really see Draco as a replacement for either of my current DWARF telescopes.

The DWARF 3 is small enough to take easily on a photography trip. The DWARF Mini pushes portability even further.

Draco weighs 5.5 kg, or about 12.1 pounds, compared with roughly 3 pounds for the DWARF 3 and less than 2 pounds for the Mini.

That is a big difference.

Draco is still portable compared with a traditional telescope, mount, camera, and other astrophotography equipment. But it is not something I’m going to casually add to my camera bag.

I see the three telescopes this way:

DWARF Mini: Maximum portability.

DWARF 3: A very good balance of portability and astrophotography capability.

Draco: Better imaging capability when size and weight aren’t the primary concern.

DWARFLAB Draco vs. DWARF 3 vs. DWARF Mini Specifications

Here are the hardware and imaging differences that matter most when comparing Draco with the DWARF 3 and Mini.

Specification	DWARF Mini	DWARF 3	Draco
Telephoto Aperture	30mm	35mm	90mm
Telephoto Focal Length	150mm	150mm	340mm*
Telephoto Equivalent	1,016mm	737mm	1,200mm
Telephoto Sensor	Sony IMX662, 1/2.8-inch	Sony IMX678, 1/1.8-inch	1/1.3-inch CMOS
Telephoto Resolution	2MP Raw	8.3MP	50MP native / approx. 12MP deep-sky
Wide Sensor	1/2.8-inch	1/2.8-inch	1/1.55-inch
Wide-Angle Equivalent	45mm	45mm	23.3mm
Maximum Astro Exposure	180 sec.	60 sec. scheduled / longer manually	300 sec.
Built-In Guiding	No	No	Yes
Active CMOS Cooling	No	No	Yes
Dedicated Dew Prevention	No	No	Yes
Rotating Sensor	No	No	Yes
Weight	840g	1.35kg	5.5kg / 12.1 lb.
Battery Life	About 4 hours	About 5.5 hours	About 5 hours
Storage	64GB	128GB	128GB**
Current / Launch Price	$419	$549	$1,299 Standard / $1,499 SHO

*DWARFLAB currently lists Draco’s 90mm aperture and 1,200mm-equivalent focal length but does not appear to list the actual focal length in its main specifications. Several astronomy retailers are listing Draco as a 340mm f/3.8 telescope, so I am treating those numbers as retailer specifications until DWARFLAB confirms them directly.

**DWARFLAB does not currently list Draco’s storage capacity on its launch specifications page. Multiple astronomy retailers list 128GB of internal storage, so I am treating this as a retailer-published specification until DWARFLAB confirms it directly.

The software feature gap is much smaller than the hardware gap. Through firmware and app updates, the DWARF 3 and Mini already support features such as Astro Mosaic, Mega Stack, Scheduled Shooting, Milky Way Mode, and Star Trail Mode. That means Draco’s biggest advantages are the things the smaller telescopes can’t gain through firmware: the 90mm aperture, larger sensor, guiding, cooling, rotating sensor, and longer exposure capability.

Draco’s biggest advantages are therefore not software features. They are the new hardware.

The 90mm Aperture Is the Biggest Upgrade

The Draco’s 90mm aperture immediately caught my attention.

The DWARF 3 has a 35mm telephoto aperture and the Mini has a 30mm aperture. Draco increases that to 90mm.

A bigger aperture collects considerably more light, which should help Draco record fainter objects and more detail than the smaller DWARF telescopes.

This is probably the single specification that makes me most interested in testing Draco against my DWARF 3 and Mini.

A Larger Telephoto Sensor

Draco also gets a larger 1/1.3-inch telephoto sensor compared with the 1/1.8-inch sensor in the DWARF 3 and 1/2.8-inch sensor in the Mini.

DWARFLAB lists the Draco sensor at 50 megapixels. For deep-sky photography, it combines pixels to produce images of approximately 12 megapixels. The expected benefit is cleaner low-light images and better detail.

For the Sun, Moon, and planets, Draco can also take advantage of the sensor’s higher native resolution.

I’m interested to see how much difference this makes when I process the files myself rather than relying entirely on the finished image from the DWARFLAB app.

Why Isn’t Draco’s 1,200mm Equivalent Much Longer Than the Mini?

This specification initially surprised me.

The Mini is rated at 1,016mm equivalent, while Draco is only somewhat longer at 1,200mm equivalent.

The reason is sensor size.

Both the DWARF Mini and DWARF 3 use a 150mm actual focal length, but the Mini’s smaller sensor creates a much tighter crop. That is why the Mini has a 1,016mm-equivalent view while the DWARF 3 is only 737mm equivalent.

Draco uses a much longer actual focal length — reportedly 340mm — but it also has a larger sensor.

The real Draco advantage isn’t simply more reach. It is combining that field of view with a 90mm aperture, larger sensor, guiding, cooling, and longer exposure capability.

300-Second Exposures and Built-In Guiding

Draco can expose for up to 300 seconds.

The DWARF Mini can now expose for up to 180 seconds, a capability that was added through a firmware and app update. The DWARF 3 supports 60-second exposures in scheduled shooting and can use longer exposures manually.

Draco’s advantage is its built-in guide scope.

Guiding makes small tracking corrections during long exposures, helping keep stars sharp. Combined with active cooling and the larger aperture, that should make Draco better suited for longer deep-sky imaging sessions.

Active Cooling and Dew Prevention

Draco also adds active CMOS cooling.  Cooling the sensor should help reduce noise during long deep-sky exposures.

Draco also includes automatic dew prevention, using internal heat to help keep moisture from forming on the optics.

That is a practical feature I like. Dew can ruin an imaging session regardless of how good the telescope is, and with Draco it is handled as part of the system.

The Rotating Sensor Does More Than Help With Composition

Draco can physically rotate its imaging sensor.

That helps with composition, but it also serves a more important purpose for astrophotography. As the sky appears to rotate during tracking, Draco can rotate the sensor to counter that field rotation.

The practical benefit is cleaner long-exposure images without requiring the same level of polar alignment normally needed to control field rotation.

For deep-sky imaging and mosaics, that could make setup easier while also giving more control over composition.

This is definitely worth adding. It is not just a convenience feature; it is part of how Draco supports longer-exposure imaging.

The 23.3mm Wide-Angle Camera May Be a Bigger Deal Than It Sounds

One Draco feature that immediately interests me is the secondary camera.

The DWARF 3 and DWARF Mini wide cameras are equivalent to about 45mm.

Draco goes all the way to 23.3mm equivalent and uses a larger 1/1.55-inch sensor.

That is a much more useful focal length for photographing:

• The Milky Way
• Star trails
• Wide night skies
• Landscapes with the night sky

The telephoto camera is obviously the headline feature, but the much wider secondary camera could make Draco more versatile for the types of night photography I enjoy.

Don’t Overlook How Much the DWARF 3 and Mini Have Improved

One thing the specification table doesn’t fully show is how much DWARFLAB has added to the existing telescopes through firmware and app updates.

The Mini can now make exposures up to 180 seconds. Both the Mini and DWARF 3 have gained features including Milky Way Mode, Star Trail Mode, Astro Mosaic, Mega Stack, and more advanced scheduled shooting.

That matters when deciding whether to upgrade.

You aren’t comparing Draco with the DWARF 3 or Mini as they existed when they were first released. You are comparing it with telescopes that have continued to gain features.

For me, that makes Draco’s hardware improvements even more important. The reason to upgrade isn’t simply to get the latest software features.

It is the 90mm aperture, larger sensor, guiding, cooling, and other hardware that the smaller telescopes can’t gain through a firmware update.

Standard Draco vs. Draco SHO

There are two Draco versions.

The Standard Edition is currently $1,299 during the launch promotion, while the SHO Edition is $1,499.

Both include the Astro filter and an Hα + O III dual-narrowband filter.

The difference is the third filter.

The Standard version includes a built-in ND filter for solar photography.

The SHO version replaces that with an additional S II + O III filter designed for automated SHO, or Hubble Palette, nebula imaging. Solar photography is still supported with the SHO version, but it uses an external ND solar filter instead.

I pre-ordered the Draco SHO.

My DWARF 3 and Mini can already photograph emission nebulae using their Hα + O III filters, but the SHO version adds the S II data needed for full SHO or Hubble Palette processing.

I also like having that capability built into the telescope rather than deciding later that I wish I had purchased it.

The Standard Draco will probably make more sense for photographers who want the broadest mix of astronomy and solar photography. For someone primarily interested in deep-sky imaging and who wants the option to create SHO images, I think the SHO version is more interesting.

I think that is more accurate and clearer about what the extra $200 actually buys you.

So, Should You Upgrade From the DWARF 3 or Mini?

I don’t think the answer is automatically yes.

Draco is clearly more capable on paper, but it also costs more than twice as much as the DWARF 3 and weighs about four times as much.

I’d consider Draco if deep-sky photography is becoming a bigger part of what you do and you want more imaging capability without moving to a traditional telescope, equatorial mount, and dedicated astronomy camera.

The 90mm aperture, larger sensor, 300-second exposures, guiding, and active cooling are substantial upgrades.

But if portability is one of the main reasons you own a DWARF 3 or Mini, Draco doesn’t replace that advantage. In fact, I think the Mini and Draco are almost opposite approaches.

The Mini is built around maximum portability. Draco is built around better imaging capability.

I Don’t Think Draco Makes My DWARF 3 or Mini Obsolete

Even though I’ve pre-ordered Draco, I’m not planning to replace either of my current DWARF telescopes.

The DWARF 3 is still much easier to take on a photography trip. At roughly three pounds, I can find room for it without completely changing how I pack. The Mini is even easier to bring along. A 12-pound Draco is a different decision.

I expect my use will probably look something like this:

Draco: Backyard imaging, dark-sky locations I can drive to, and nights when deep-sky image quality is the priority.

DWARF 3: Travel and situations where I want good astrophotography capability without carrying a lot of additional weight.

DWARF Mini: Situations where portability matters most.

There is also an advantage to keeping more than one smart telescope. In the backyard, I can have multiple DWARFs imaging different deep-sky targets at the same time. Draco could be working on a faint nebula or galaxy while the DWARF 3 and Mini are collecting data on other targets.

Why I Pre-Ordered the DWARFLAB Draco SHO

For me, the biggest attractions are the 90mm aperture, larger sensor, guiding, active cooling, and 300-second exposure capability.

I’ve enjoyed using the DWARF 3 and DWARF Mini because they make astrophotography easy without requiring a traditional telescope setup.

Draco appears to take that same idea and push the imaging capability considerably further.

The SHO version adds a built-in S II + O III filter, giving me the ability to capture S II, Hα, and O III data for SHO or Hubble Palette processing while keeping the automated smart-telescope workflow that attracted me to DWARFLAB in the first place.

Once it arrives, I’ll compare it directly with my DWARF 3 and Mini on some of the same deep-sky targets.

Right now, I’m expecting Draco to be considerably better.

The bigger question is whether it will be better enough to justify carrying a 12-pound smart telescope instead of a 3-pound or sub-2-pound one.

That’s the comparison I’m most interested in making.

Want to Learn More

1. Dwarf Telescope EQ Mode Setup: Step-by-Step Guide for Deep Sky Astrophotography 
2. DWARF LAB Mega Stack Guide: How to Combine Multiple Nights for Better Astrophotography Images 
3. How to Plan DWARF 3 and DWARF Mini Astrophotography Sessions in Stellarium