A few months ago I decided to start on a very budget approach to a first telescope and maybe some imaging. I first built a pretty standard dobsonian with some used parts from the classifieds here, and some new inexpensive stuff from other sources. I ended up with a 6" PM with a 1200mm focal length.
I knew tracking was an issue, but then I learned about lucky imaging and decided I'd give it a shot. This past week I finally got a camera that will come to focus, an IMX174, one shot color, based industrial camera from ebay. I also wrote a python script to do the image alignment and stacking, because I thought it was fun. It mostly uses OpenCV, and handles the alignment totally without user input.
Monday was my first attempt, it was very hazy, windy, and generally not conducive to good imaging, but I had new shiny toys, so I tried anyhow.
Top 5% frames selected
Thursday was much clearer, so I took many shots with the moon starting in different positions in the fov, with the intention to build a mosaic at some point. This is only one of the shots, stacked and processed on its own.
Top 20% of frames selected
Slightly altered stacking algorithm, with slightly different deconvolution parameters in startools.
I didn't bother with any calibration frames for either image.
I'm pretty pleased with the second one, but I see some images out there with far, far, more detail and I'm wondering how they do it. Most of them use larger scopes of some catadioptric layout, as well as tracking. I don't think tracking is it, because of the very short exposures in lucky imaging. Is it abberations that aren't well corrected in the Newtonian layout? I'm still climbing the learning curve, so maybe it's just editing and capture skill. Every image do at this point ends up better than the previous one.
Anyhow, I'm curious what the community thinks of these and if there's any advice on finding some more detail.
Edited by copper280z, 09 November 2019 - 08:17 AM.