[The_bluester (Paul)]

A quick bit of background, I am currently imaging at quite a small image scale, using a ZWO ASI294 (4.63 micron pixels) on a C925 with a focal reducer with the spacing arranged to give me about 0.68 reduction ratio for a reasonable compromise between field of view, vignetting, coma and speed.

I am looking at branching into much more widefield stuff, still a the budget end of the spectrum. Something like the Skywatcher Evostar ED72 might fit the bill and most calculators put that in the "Slight undersampling" category with my camera.

For similar money though there is the likes of the William Optics Redcat 51mm, but that pushes into "Significant undersamplling" territory and would be around 3.8 arcseconds per pixel.

Just how much data can be retrieved via drizzle integration if images are well dithered? Amd I likely to end up with a disappointing result with that sort of combination? A second camera is not on the cards.

While it costs a lot more, the Celestron 8" RASA almost looks like it was made with my camera in mind and at F2 imaging would be seriously fast! But with how tiny the critical focus zone is going to be, I would not even consider that without a focus motor with very fine steps so focus could be automated and run regularly as temperature changed, the SCT is bad enough for focus changes as it is and I have seen talk of refocusing the RASA scopes as often as every 15 minutes to keep them sharp if the temperature is changing.

That is by the by, my real question is how undersampled can you go and still extract good information with drizzle?