Astrophotoguru · Compare

cameracomparison · 2-way

ZWO ASI6200MM Pro vs QHYCCD QHY268M

ZWO ASI6200MM Pro
ZWO

ASI6200MM Pro

A strong fit for dedicated deep-sky imagers pairing with wide-field refractors.

QHYCCD QHY268M
QHYCCD

QHY268M

A strong fit for dedicated deep-sky imagers pairing with a broad range of focal lengths.

Key differences

53% larger sensor
138% more resolution

Specifications

SpecificationZWO ASI6200MM ProQHYCCD QHY268M
Sensor
TypeDedicated CooledDedicated Cooled
SensorSony IMX455Sony IMX571
Sensor techCMOSCMOS
FormatFull FrameAPS-C
Sensor size36.0×24.0mm23.5×15.7mm
Diagonal43.3mm28.3mm
Pixel size3.76µm3.76µm
Resolution9576×63886280×4210
Megapixels62.0MP26.0MP
ColorNoNo
Cooling
CooledYesYes
Performance
Full well51400e⁻51000e⁻
Peak QE91%91%
Advantages of ZWO ASI6200MM Pro
  • Larger sensor (43.3mm vs 28.3mm diagonal) — wider field
  • Higher resolution (62MP vs 26MP)
Advantages of QHYCCD QHY268M

Closely matched on the compared specs.

Best for — ZWO ASI6200MM Pro
  • Wide-field mosaics and full-frame telescopes
  • Well-sampled deep-sky at medium focal lengths
  • Long-exposure deep-sky under any sky
  • Narrowband and LRGB workflows
Best for — QHYCCD QHY268M
  • Balanced field for most refractors
  • Well-sampled deep-sky at medium focal lengths
  • Long-exposure deep-sky under any sky
  • Narrowband and LRGB workflows
ZWO ASI6200MM Pro — typical FOV & scale
  • On 250mm refractor (wide)
    FOV: 8.25° × 5.50°Scale: 3.10"/px
  • On 800mm SCT reducer
    FOV: 2.58° × 1.72°Scale: 0.97"/px
  • On 2000mm SCT native
    FOV: 1.03° × 0.69°Scale: 0.39"/px
QHYCCD QHY268M — typical FOV & scale
  • On 250mm refractor (wide)
    FOV: 5.39° × 3.60°Scale: 3.10"/px
  • On 800mm SCT reducer
    FOV: 1.68° × 1.12°Scale: 0.97"/px
  • On 2000mm SCT native
    FOV: 0.67° × 0.45°Scale: 0.39"/px
ZWO ASI6200MM Pro — recommended user

A strong fit for dedicated deep-sky imagers pairing with wide-field refractors.

QHYCCD QHY268M — recommended user

A strong fit for dedicated deep-sky imagers pairing with a broad range of focal lengths.

Recommended alternatives