I respectfully disagree with this notion. The KAF-16200 is 34.6mm diagonal. Many scopes that amateurs use have 40mm or less in terms of available imaging circle. To fill the full frame 36x24 chip the cost of the optics will be much higher, while the chip is more expensive.
People do realize this right? A $5000 CMOS camera (just the camera) vs a $4500 all in one 16200 solution on the market (camera, wheel, OAG).
Now go price OAG's with aperture enough for that chip, wheels for the filters... then come back and we can chat.
Oh yeah, I get your point and I have been teetering over the buy button for a G3-16200mkii at the Moravian site for about 7months while this camera has been in open development. As far as the imaging circle goes, I have one scope with a big enough circle to manage that FF CMOS monster and one that is close, but probably better suited for an APS-H size sensor. I am speculating at this juncture as I have not seen a Light sub yet. But for me, the upside of the potential new tech in this chip kind of spells the end of an era for CCD cameras. Bit depth is no longer a deficit, well capacity is greatly improved, the much smaller pixel size can be a substantial advantage for smaller wider field refractors. Noise Noise Noise, substantial advantage to the CMOS. Super fast downloads. I contend that this chip may actually prompt telescope designers to cater to its potential and we may see a spike in optics that offer a much larger imaging circle at lower prices.
As far as cost goes, here is something that I don't think I have read much (if any) about in this thread, and I am not sure we all realize it either. CMOS subs are always much shorter in duration, and with this, the need for mounts that can track near perfectly for 20-30 mins is essentially gone. Think closer to 60s-8mins max. I am currently working on an image with NB subs of 180s for Sii and last night they were 90s for Oiii. I am sure at a dark site and with a new moon I could go longer, but I would say I am currently seriously over mounted for the task. I don't even bother to plug the OAG in. A lower cost mount would easily offset any increase in outlay for a new FW and OAG if one were to start anew. I won't be getting rid of my mount, but I am not convinced that such accuracy is mandatory any longer if the IMX455 and other new Sony chips actually deliver.