Quote:
Originally Posted by Camelopardalis
Maybe I’m losing it after lockdown, but I’m struggling to see the advantage of the 2400 vs the 6200 
Maybe on a larger scope where sub-4 micron pixels are less desirable? |
You can bin the 6200 and get 7.5nm pixels and a bit of extra sensitivity and still be at 15mp (the famous full frame KAI11000 sensor is 11mp).
Then again the 2400 could also be binned into a 6mp full frame nearly 12nm pixel sensor. That sounds like it would cost a fair bit of resolution though.
File size would be one large benefit. 24mp files are probably around 48mb whereas the 6200 they are 122mb. That would also slow down processing time a lot as well.
I'd love to see some comparable images highlighting the difference between 14 and 16 bit.
I remember seeing some comparisons between the 14bit Nikon D800 and 16bit medium format cameras. It was subtle. Better graduations between colours in the image.
Also I am wondering just how important this matching pixel size to optics and seeing conditions really is. I am not seeing much of an issue with the 183mm on my Honders at .43 arc secs per pixel. A bit harder to focus and more susceptible to seeing are the main problems. On the plus side the 20mp small sensor gives rounder stars as there are more pixels in each star than normal. It makes them look very round, rounder than normal.
Greg.