Depends on your seeing.
I can get sharper results using my ML16200 with 6 micron pixels with my CDK17 if the seeing is reasonable. That is compared to my Proline 16803 with 9 micron pixels.
If the seeing is weaker then the Proline is better.
ASI6200mm has 3.76 micron pixels which are smaller than almost any CCD.
2x2 binning would give you 15mp x 7.12 micron pixels which would be sufficient. Plus the file size would be a lot less, back down to a manageable 30.5mb each plus you gain a bit in sensitivity and signal to noise ratio. Plus I would doubt you would see the drop in resolution as 61mp is way overkill resolution for astro where 8.3mp often shows sharp images. This is all at 845 QE which no current common CCD can match and also read noise down as low as .7 electron. Modern CCDs run at about 6-12 read noise. Dark current is also much lower than CCDs.CMOS sensors though can generate a noise called "walking noise". I haven't seen it yet. I believe its easily avoidable and is a result of too low a gain on some models.
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/6...in-processing/
On paper the ASI6200 mono is in a new league. In practice I haven't seen too many images from it despite it being out for several months. The supply is always backlogged though and they are hard to get. Martin's images are with the QHY600m which is the same sensor but slightly different implementation. On checking on threads on Cloudy Nights though it seems the crowd prefers ASI over QHY due to a lot having been burnt in the past with poor drivers. I must admit, poor drivers would be a huge turn off for me having had those sorts of issues with FLI in the past. They eventually sorted their drivers although not 100% compared to other camera drivers. QHY offers different modes that can extract greater well depth but at the expense of higher read noise. I guess that would be handy if your were imaging Alnitak. You'd want maximum well depth so Alnitak would not be a giant bright ball of light in the image.
The ASI6200 would be good at 1x1 binning arbitrarily up to around 900mm focal length. Certainly excellent for widefield refractor imaging like an FSQ106 up to somewhere around a130mm APO.
Generally speaking small pixels are for widefield setups. Not a hard rule though as look at Lee's ASI183 2.4 micron pixel/250mm F4 Newt images. That's at 1000mm focal length or close and they are superb images.
That's where the 61mp is handy - for binning without any large loss of resolution. Martin Pugh posted some example images binned and unbinned about 4 months ago and they looked the same except the binned had an improved signal to noise ratio.
These CMOS sensors have higher MP count than your regular Astro CCDs and its one of their advantages.
Keep in mind 2x2 binning is only software binning not hardware binning which requires specific chip architecture which these Sony sensors don't have (mirrorless cameras don't offer binning at this stage).
For what its worth I would love to have one of these ASI6200 mono cams. My experience with the ASI183mm Pro has been positive.
I probably though am leaning towards the ASI2600mm Pro once its available. Same specs but APSc and US$1500 cheaper. If they had a mono version of the new ASI2400mc I would be interested as well as now you get 5.94 micron pixels and is like a KAF16200 except full frame.
The KAF 16200 is proving to be a sensor that works on any scope. The longer the focal length the more its sensitive to seeing but then so are long focal length scopes anyway so nothing new there.
Greg.
