[Stonius (Markus)]

Okay, so I'm a big fan of seeing things with my own eyes, but that doesn't stop me from attempting to capture some brighter objects with my 8" f/6 dob (see below for my latest attempt).

I'm told that one needs a tracking scope to get the really stunning images seen in these forums. Fair enough. What I'm not sure is why you can't just capture the same total number of frames with a non-tracking scope, as the object drifts through the field of view?

Is it because;

1) EP projection has issues with focal plane curvature and other optical problems because *suprise* eyepieces are made for eyes, not cameras. Even so, shouldn't I be able to negate 80% of those issues by only using frames where the planet is near the centre of the field, even if it requires joining several passes together?

2) Even with a 5x Barlow, Jupiter is still only ever going to be 28 pixels edge to edge in my 5DMkii. Maybe 'proper people' have scopes with higher f/ ratios? Or smaller sensor sizes?

3) Is it that the movement of the object through the frame is enough to create motion blur on each frame that obliterates all the finer details.

If the problem is the first or second issue, I can buy a 5x barlow and see how I go, but I won't use it for visual observing, so it would be a waste of money if it won't make any difference.

If the problem is the motion blur, maybe one day I'll have a more sensitive camera, but at least I'll know that there's not much I can improve on till that day.

So, would a Barlow help?