|
On my FSQ I am under sampled at 2" per pixel just like Rick at SRO and on my RC12 I am slightly over sampled at 0.76" per pixel.
It is better to be slightly over sampled (meaning the system has sub arc second coverage per pixel) than under sampled. Some of the advantages are sharpening of detail and stars are round. Although there are exceptions to this thinking. An FSQ106 with 11002 sensor being one I can think of easily. Results with a 9.0um pixel are exceptional in that example.
I agree that I think you are under sampled at 1.9".
However, 7.4 will still produce good results if everything else is working as it should.
|