Thanks James, George, Bruce, and Tareq for the comments. This post sort of got put on the back burner while I was dealing the eclipse, but thanks for the kind words.
George, the scope is an old Meade that I picked up from a friend of mine. They stopped making the model years ago, but it is very similar to an entry level 4.5 inch F/9 such as the following, although mine has a 910mm focal length and is F/8.
Celestron also makes a nearly identical model. It is an entry level scope, and not designed for serious use or imaging, but it actually manages to produce fairly astounding results considering. At most phases, the entire Moon does fit onto the IMX183 sensor, although as James pointed out, if the Full (or nearly full) Moon is close to perigee, then it will not quite fit along the short axis of the sensor. I have very recently purchased a new scope to replace this one, that has a nearly identical focal length but with 6 inches of aperture. I used this in combination with a DSLR for the lunar eclipse, although I only had the scope for a few days and had not yet had time to really dial in the collimation. As a result, there is some coma in some of the stars in the field, but I have been tinkering with collimation and the coma corrector, and will soon make a post with some new images. The old 4.5 inch Meade needed replacing, because the focuser was terrible, and the secondary mirror holder was actually broken and was being crudely patched with duct tape. Nevertheless, it still works well although it's kind of a pain to use for those reasons. I like having something that can fit the entire Moon into one frame, because with the small pixels of the IMX183 sensor, one can still achieve very nice resolution despite being under-sampled for the aperture (ideal sampling requires ~F/12 for the 2.4um pixels, but then the Moon definitely does not fit into one frame). For even more resolution, I have a C9.25 Edge, and that produces great results in combination with the IMX183 sensor, but requires mosaics for the entire Moon, and even with just a few panels, this significantly adds to the workflow on both the capture and processing side (even more so at higher resolution because any flaws are more visible). Therefore I only like to take that approach when conditions are very good. At other times, it's more fun to get a quick capture in a single video.
Edited by Tom Glenn, 25 January 2019 - 05:49 AM.