I am interested in a comparison between these 2 cameras.
On paper the comparison seems to go:
ASI mono QHY600 mono
Better dew control
reliable software drivers Supposed to be fine now but were problematic at some point.
256mb DRAM 111 2 gigabyte DRAM 111
has fine random horizontal line Has corrected this and no longer shows it.
Complaints about M54 opening too small Opening of the QHY seems to be quite large
and needing tilt adapter. Tilt adapter seems standard.
Latest model has M68 opening
Does not have this Multiple modes some which extend the full well capacity from standard of 51K to 80K.
Threads on ASI6200 talk endlessly about adapters
etc and hardly any images on the net using it. There are a lot more images from users of the QHY600.
Any comments about these 2?
Looks like you pasted in a table of some sort, without the table formatting. This makes your post hard to read.
1. Dew control - both cameras use heated applications to prevent dew. QHY supplies a tube you can full with desiccant beads. They provide this with all of their cameras, and most folks dont bother using it. I don't think there is enough real world data to suggest the QHY camera has better dew prevention. Neither have purged argon chambers.
2. Driver Support - ZWO's driver support is leaps and bounds better. This isnt even close. ASCOM, Native, SkyX x2, INDI all supported.
3. RAM - The RAM buffer difference is irrelevant unless you plan to get the QHY professional model with fiber support.
4. Tilt Plate & Adapter Drama - The entire QHY camera config is M54. The complaints you mentioned were founded in some cases and not founded in others. ZWO offers a M68 tilt plate now to support those that need more clear aperture at the connection point. With QHY, you do not have that option. When comparing things, you should probably avoid "seems to be...." as in this case, it is not larger. Its smaller. The ZWO tilt adapter is standard for M54, and you need to buy a $29 M68 one, if you need the larger one. It is worth calling out that the QHY "tilt adapter" slides onto a dovetail on the face of the camera and locks into place with 3 thumbscrews. Personally, you would never catch me using that. I would get the short backfocus version which does not have that design fault and bolts directly on with no silly thumbscrew plate that is just asking to slip around and cause havok.
5. Modes - I dont know anything about these modes QHY talks about. The IMX455 supports binning though, as another poster pointed out. Perhaps QHY can explain what they mean by these modes and why we should care. Their website is clear as mud about it.
6. Images - Lack of images from the ASI6200 is due to people waiting on their cameras to arrive. Patience is a virtue. QHY released an "Early Bird" version of their camera well before the ASI6200 released -- thus there has been much more time for folks to accumulate data with the QHY versus the ASI6200.
Edit, missed one:
7. Vertical line - This is caused by multiple ADC's, similar to what you see with the FLI-50100. It calibrates out, so its irrelevant. No idea what horizontal line you are talking about. Have not seen this in a single ASI6200 frame.
Edited by rockstarbill, 01 May 2020 - 12:04 PM.