I attempted to do some lucky imaging of Jupiter using a permanent installation (Celestron 14" SCT + Paramount ME II) and Nikon D5600 attached directly to a Baader Hyperion 8-24mm eyepiece (without a filter). The atmospheric conditions weren't ideal (65% humidity, 2 m/s winds), the telescope was properly acclimated prior to use, and Jupiter was around 17 degrees elevation during imaging.

After processing 3600 frames (from 1 minute of [video][1]<sup>1</sup> at 60 fps) with [Autostakkert 3][2] and then aligning the RGB channels and recomposing I got these:

<img src="https://i.sstatic.net/dwXps.jpg" width="300" /><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/QziLe.jpg" width="322" />

Left (or top if your screen is small) is using 20% of the stack, right (or bottom) is using 50%. Since this is my first foray into planetary imaging my question is: **are my results reasonable given the setup used and atmospheric conditions described?**<sup>2</sup>

I'm asking because I've seen much better results from people using smaller telescopes. I think the discrepancy is the result of one (or several) of the following:

 1. Something is wrong with the equipment I used.
 2. I'm using the wrong equipment.
 3. I'm not processing the images correctly.
 4. This is the best the equipment could do under those conditions.

and I'm trying to rule out number 1.

---

Here is a single, unprocessed frame for reference:

[![enter image description here][3]][3]

---
<sup>1</sup> Note that the video in the link has been compressed through ffmpeg using the H.265 codec with CRF of 25. <br>

<sup>2</sup> This result is just one example - I did 30 minutes of imaging in 3 minute segments over the course of several hours, applying the same process to other sets of exposures yielded similar results.

---


  [1]: https://i.sstatic.net/25MA8.jpg
  [2]: https://www.autostakkert.com/wp/
  [3]: https://i.sstatic.net/AjkVw.jpg