> Second is advanced image processing with deep learning. There is no need for accurate sky tracker anymore, you just shot many images and software combines.

This is extremely helpful for professional astronomers, but having started astrophotography back in the day with a 35mm Rollei that allowed for arbitrary exposure, the moon, and a very numb index finger, I feel that the one image you produce with care and accuracy trumps the collage on some emotional dimension for me.

The collage is obviously the better image, but the amateur's photograph somehow captures both stars and stargazer.

I don't have any problems in a suburban area of the Bay Area with a small refractor. I can see bright nebulas, etc. The only reason for the big scope in a dark area is if you're trying to look at deep sky objects.

You still need a sky tracker to get enough exposures and generally, you want the item centered because that's where the optics are best.

We all know Bay Area is a great place to live geographically ;) Try to find black zone around Chicago for example.

I live in the middle of the peninsula- I can see orange in every direction I look at night. I just think this only matters when looking at DSOs. And generally, cities are bad for astro because of all the heat turbulence.

Can you pls. explain more on how to combine? :-)

I don't know of easy to use software for this, but algorithms are there like in https://benedikt-bitterli.me/astro/

This was a good read. Thanks!