KAF 16200 mono replacement Kodak / ON Semi KAF-16200 (mono) · Javier Figueroa · ... · 7 · 492 · 0

Hello Javier,

AG is not producing astronomical products anymore. You may find used Optical Tubes however. 

Regarding the choice of sensor, many superb as well as scientific images available here were produced with cmos sensors with oversampling if we base ourselves on the CCD standard. There have been numerous discussions on the forums on the subject since their release and despite several detractors of these new generations of cameras, it must be admitted that the results clearly attest to the versatility and effectiveness of the latter. Never has amateur astronomy been as productive as today at all levels thanks to the use of these sensors. If you are going to invest on a AG like optical tube, mono sensor is the way to go.

my 2 cents,

CS Patrick

AG is not producing astronomical products anymore. You may find used Optical Tubes however.

Thank you for the response, I agree with you on that sensor, it does look pretty good, but not sure if purchasing one in 2024 is a good investment, mostly because it will probably be used since they don’t make them no more, hopefully we can get CMOS with similar specs to the 16200,

thank you and clear skies.

Hi Javier, I'm a little late replying to your post.  I have a Starlight Xpress SX-46 which has the KAF 16200 chip.  I bought it used  in 2020.  Up to that point, I had only used Sony CCD chips.
I was interested in the KAF 16200 for the size chip for wider field.  Starlight Xpress put Grade 1 chips in the SX-46.  I believe Finger Lakes did also.  I'm not sure about other manufactures.  Finger Lakes probably made the best version.

The pros are: Nice size chip, 6nm pixels (if you are using longer focal length scopes),  smooth even bias and darks,  cooling to -40, can use 2" filters

The cons are: large & heavy, Kodak chip needs a mechanical shutter,  65 QE, 9e Read Noise.

I found the download time equal to my QHY268M.  I use 5min subs or longer, so the read noise was not an issue.  I use a smaller 5 x 2" filter wheel because I use the camera at a dark site for LRGB.  If I use it at home (Bortle 7),  I do 3 filter narrow band imaging.   Not long after buying the SX-46, I bought a QHY268M (IMX571) and have used it mostly for better sampling with short focal length refractors.  Unlike your focal length, mine is the opposite.   I use a FSQ106ED at F3.6 and a AP130GTX at F4.5.  

However after viewing John Hays's talk on the Astro Imaging Channel, I am reconsidering the SX-46 to be my primary camera on the AP130GTX.  Check out John's post and the talk link in in the post.  It has a lot of advanced math (which I couldn't follow), but will explain a lot about how aperture and pixel size works.

https://www.astrobin.com/forum/c/astrophotography/other/


 John has also included a Excel spread sheet that can plot statistics regarding aperture and pixel size.  I was surprised to see when I used the QHY268M on the AP130GTX at F4.5, I only would get 65% of the light signal to a pixel, that the FSQ106ED at F3.65 would get.   The pixel aec/sec/pix resolution sampling is about the same.  Using the SX-46 with 6nm pixel on the AP130, brought the light signal to a pixel equal to the FSQ106 with the QHY268M.   That explained why I was not seeing a great deal resolution increase in the 130mm aperture using the QHY268M.

I highly recommend you watch John Hays's talk.  I think it will confirm your need from larger pixels.  I have posted very few of my images on Astrobin, and have not posed any done with the SX-46.

Lynn K.