|
Not a dumb question :-)
I'm often imaging at 0.74"/px these days, which means I have a very low tolerance before things affect the final image. For guiding to correct an issue it has to see it first, and when guiding corrects an issue it has the potential to over-correct, causing even more issues.
Couple the above with the fact that I'm often imaging in less than perfect seeing, where the stars naturally bounce around a bit, it's easy for guiding to make things worse than it has to be. PE + bad seeing = guiding can't possibly be doing as good as it could be. I can't do much about the seeing, but I can do something about the PE.
In an ideal world I'd prefer to work unguided, and I'll do that when I can. With PEC and good PA, I'm sure I can do that with my smaller scope. I've heard of people in the UK using my same mount and running at high resolution for subs of up to 30mins unguided before trailing became a problem, so if I can do that with my big scope, I might do that as well. At the very least I want to minimise issues before they hit my sensor, not afterwards.
|