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 $17^{\circ}$ 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.
 5. I did something wrong in my setup, imaging, or processing.

and I'm trying to rule out number 1.

---

Here is a single, unprocessed frame for reference:

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

---

<h2> Update </h2>

I have acquired a Bahtinov mask to rule out the focus as the issue, here is an exposure of Manubrij (*Omnicron Sagittarii*) with the mask:

[![enter image description here][4]][4]

At the time of imaging, the angular separation between Jupiter and this star was less than $6^{\circ}$. Conditions were much better this time, humidity was $38$%, winds were less than $1$ m/s. The telescope was acclimated for about 2 hours prior to use.

Again using $3600$ frames af $60$ fps I got these:

<img src="https://i.sstatic.net/O26sE.jpg" width="300" /><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/RUZ0c.jpg" width="300" />

Left (or top) is with $10$% of the stack, right (or bottom) is with $20$%. This looks slightly better to me, but I'm still not sure if this is what I should expect from the equipment.

---
<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
  [4]: https://i.sstatic.net/oNvyN.jpg