Astrophotoguru · Compare

cameracomparison · 2-way

QHYCCD QHY5III200M vs Player One Apollo-M Max

QHYCCD QHY5III200M
QHYCCD

QHY5III200M

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

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.

Specifications

SpecificationQHYCCD QHY5III200MPlayer One Apollo-M Max
Sensor
Typeguide-cameraplanetary
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 QHYCCD QHY5III200M

Closely matched on the compared specs.

Advantages of Player One Apollo-M Max

Closely matched on the compared specs.

Best for — QHYCCD QHY5III200M
  • Longer focal lengths — tighter framing on small targets
  • Fast, low-noise deep-sky at short focal lengths
  • Narrowband and LRGB workflows
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
QHYCCD QHY5III200M — 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 — 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
QHYCCD QHY5III200M — recommended user

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

Player One Apollo-M Max — recommended user

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

Recommended alternatives