Kevin_A after carefully looking at your log screenshot it appears your guiding is occurring at a much larger scale than mine since we both use a similar FL guide scope(240mm) but your image scale asi120mm is 60% larger; I believe your are even more under sampled than my setup. I wonder if that’s a reason your guide performance on average could reach better numbers? Is it possible that with this degree of under sampling, you are not able to detect as much error resulting in seemingly better guide performance?
Please don’t take this the wrong way, I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with your setup. I’m just curious to understand if under sampling is effectively acting as a filter making the guiding results appear better (since a more under sampled setup is theoretically less capable of resolving star movement details) . Do you notice any significant increase in your main images’ FWHM when you get .8” rms total error vs say .45”?
