[JohnH]

Not really fair to comapare these two - one is $1500+ the other less than half that. One a general purpose DSLR the other a dedicated astro cam. Still FWIW here are the main points of difference:

Canon gives much better resolution (8 Mp vs .4 Mp) but is far less (we are talking an order of magnitude here) sensitive - especially to Ha.

The OSS is lighter.

OSS has TEC to minimise noise.

OSS has a small sensor and is not suitable for DSOs at long FL - I get similar fov with the OSS at 400mm and the Canon at 1800mm!

Stacking/Masking/Dark Subtraction/Colour balance and other processing with the OSS is possible with the supplied s'ware - Maxim EE. Canon needs additional s'ware and cables to do long exposures.

So I like them both - they match the scopes they are on well. I can image with the Canon on the WO66 but have to crop a little as I get SA at the edges of the image, but the OSS on the VC200L with no FR is not very useful (probably ok for planets/moon - I have not tried - yet).

I find processing the OSS very different from than processing the Canon frames, the files are smaller which is good but the calibration is tedious (by hand) and getting colours right seems much harder - but that is probably because I like IP over Maxim EE fortunately IP2.8 supports the OSS. The stars seem to bloat readily in the OSS images. However it is fast and easy to use - just 30s gets you a lot of photons and you don't need to guide as a result.

Bit of a ramble there, not sure if that is what you wanted - pm me if you want any more on the OSS - I bought this mostly for guiding (and have not really got that working properly yet but that is anpther story) so I took this image to ensure my clear moonless night was not a complete write off...

The blue wobbly line looks too big to be a hot pixel - which is odd as I did do Darks. Could have been Neptune I suppose - must have been aroud there somewhere that night....