Astrophotoguru · Compare

cameracomparison · 2-way

Player One Apollo-M Max vs ZWO ASI220MM Mini

Player One Apollo-M Max
Player One

Apollo-M Max

A strong fit for photographers stepping into astro pairing with longer focal lengths where framing is tight.

ZWO ASI220MM Mini
ZWO

ASI220MM Mini

A strong fit for photographers stepping into astro pairing with longer focal lengths where framing is tight.

Specifications

SpecificationPlayer One Apollo-M MaxZWO ASI220MM Mini
Sensor
Typeplanetaryguide-camera
SensorSony IMX432Sony IMX432
Sensor techCMOSCMOS
Format1.1"1.1"
Sensor size14.1×10.6mm14.1×10.6mm
Diagonal17.6mm17.6mm
Pixel size9.00µm9.00µm
Resolution1608×11041608×1104
Megapixels1.8MP1.8MP
ColorNoNo
Cooling
CooledNoNo
Performance
Full well90000e⁻90000e⁻
Peak QE80%80%
Advantages of Player One Apollo-M Max

Closely matched on the compared specs.

Advantages of ZWO ASI220MM Mini

Closely matched on the compared specs.

Best for — Player One Apollo-M Max
  • Longer focal lengths — tighter framing on small targets
  • Fast, low-noise deep-sky at short focal lengths
  • Narrowband and LRGB workflows
Best for — ZWO ASI220MM Mini
  • Longer focal lengths — tighter framing on small targets
  • Fast, low-noise deep-sky at short focal lengths
  • Narrowband and LRGB workflows
Player One Apollo-M Max — typical FOV & scale
  • On 250mm refractor (wide)
    FOV: 3.23° × 2.42°Scale: 7.43"/px
  • On 800mm SCT reducer
    FOV: 1.01° × 0.76°Scale: 2.32"/px
  • On 2000mm SCT native
    FOV: 0.40° × 0.30°Scale: 0.93"/px
ZWO ASI220MM Mini — typical FOV & scale
  • On 250mm refractor (wide)
    FOV: 3.23° × 2.42°Scale: 7.43"/px
  • On 800mm SCT reducer
    FOV: 1.01° × 0.76°Scale: 2.32"/px
  • On 2000mm SCT native
    FOV: 0.40° × 0.30°Scale: 0.93"/px
Player One Apollo-M Max — recommended user

A strong fit for photographers stepping into astro pairing with longer focal lengths where framing is tight.

ZWO ASI220MM Mini — recommended user

A strong fit for photographers stepping into astro pairing with longer focal lengths where framing is tight.

Recommended alternatives