Differences between ASI 482 and ASI 485.

astrolang-qaz1

I have the new Zwo ASI 482MC (2,1MP and 5,8 micron pixel size) CMOS camera for my 255mm f20 Maksutov Rumak telescope. I like obtain images of the Sun, Planets and Moon. Now I have seen also Zwo ASI 485MC (8,4MP and 2,9 micron pixel size). Certainly these are two good cameras about our solar system, but I ask you the other differences between these two cameras about the quality of the images captured and the final results.

Tech@ZWO

The 485 bin2 is software bin, the 482 is born with, they are totally different.(482's pixel size is 5.8um, but 485's pixel size is 2.9um, the performance would be equal with 485 BIN2 if 485 is a mono sensor, but 485 is a color sensor, you can read this article to understand binning:
https://astronomy-imaging-camera.com/tutorials/everything-you-need-to-know-about-astrophotography-pixel-binning-the-fundamentals.html)

485 is better for shooting planets, with high resolution. The pixel size is suitable for shooting planets, and can be better matched with planetary mirrors, high-definition all-sky monitoring.
482 is good at both planets and DSO. With large pixels, it can shoot deep space EAA and meteors.

astrolang-qaz1

Ok thanks. Through my 482MC I captured some images of the Moon as you can see in "images", but now I ask you wich both 482 or 485 cameras is better about lunar imaging. I use a Maksutov Rumak 255mm f20 telescope. Pixels size of 2,9 micron are too little for lunar imaging with my f20 telescope? Actually I work with 5,8 pixel size of 482MC. Finally is better a monochromatic camera for taken lunar images ? Many thanks and sorry for disturb.

Tech@ZWO

astrolang-qaz1 Pixels size of 2,9 micron are too little for lunar imaging with my f20 telescope?

You can use below tools to calculate:
http://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/
And mono camera we recommend 174MM for lunar imaging.