Thank you Craig. Shake Reduction has only been part of Photoshop for a couple years now, and I'm sure they are still perfecting it. Very simple to use. And it can work wonders on some images.

I think part of the reason that there was shake in the first place was the construction of the lens. The lens was kind of sloppy in the middle and was prone to wiggling. The longer one zoomed out, the sloppier it got. This friend let me borrow it and give it a try. On terrestrial images, I found the contrast rather low. I don't remember the manufacturer of the lens.

I am attaching a picture of a shack or shed or whatever it is at a distance of about 1 mile. You can see that the lens is actually quite sharp. I used a full frame camera body for this image and cropped it a lot. It surprised me just how sharp it could be tweaked.

I imaged the sun this morning. I am seeing a lot of chatter about the sun's proms and spots so I went in search to see for myself this morning.

500 total pics - kept 100 and stack processed in Autostakket - then used Registax wavelets for the balance. Color was added in PSCC.

I used the Vixen ED81S refractor - Quark Chromosphere - and ASI120MM-S camera. Newton rings are a real problem when using this camera with an Ha Filter of any kind so I had to use the T-Tilter and a 2 degree tilt to minimize them. They are still present but not as bad.

I borrowed one of those el cheapo supremo 800-1600mm zoom lenses that you can buy at ridiculously low prices, and gave it a try. I wasn't too impressed with the image and it sat in my computer for 4 years until I decided to look at it again. This was taken at 800mm using my full frame Sony A99 and shot at f8 and for that lens, f8 was the only choice. I tried 1600mm, but it was basically unusable.

As you can see, the image is rather soft and has no detail.

In the meantime, Adobe Photoshop has added the Sharpening Filter Shake Reduction, and I decided to give it a try. So image 2 was sent to DxO Photolab for noise reduction and then to Photoshop for some magic with Shake Reduction and a final touch with High Pass Sharpening. And here is the after version. (Both images are heavily cropped)

One sequence but two different processing methods.
In both cases I used the save video and only change one thing, the DPI of the image in Photoshop CC.
I'll let the photos speak for them selves.
The Video was shot at 1024 X 768 at 80 frames per second.
I didn't quite get that frame rate, at 80 FPS X 60 seconds I should have had 4800 frames but only had 4300.
I ran the file through AutoStakkert2 using the planet setting and stacked 50% of the frames.
I exported to Registax6 and adjusted the wavelets, set the color balance and adjusted the exposure to center in the graph.
I took the resulting file into Photoshop and finished processing the color and sharpness.
One I saved without adjusting the image size.
One I saved after changing the DPI to 256 vs the original 72 and doing a few more tweaks with sharpness and gaussian blur.
This is how a few of us are getting larger images than what we natively shot in.
Jim

What could be a better test of a lens' C.A. than the limb of the moon? This shot of the moon through my 600mm Sigma mirror lens(paid $150.00 for it)shows NO C.A. and extreme sharpness. My sky is filthy and highly light polluted, as I live two miles from DFW Airport and exactly between Dallas and Ft. Worth. On the clearest of nights, Polaris is invisible. I have owned Takahashi scopes, for which I paid over $2000.00 which could not produce this level of APO quality. The Sigma is the equivalent of an 86mm Maksutov. Lots of bang for the buck don't you think?