[LewisM]

OK, if OAG is considered the bee's knees because it uses the main scope's optics and focal length, would second best be using a guidescope that matches the main scope's focal length and approximating aperture?

I currently use a converted 9x50 finder with a helical focuser that is a little faster in focal ratio than the FSQ106N. Was thinking if I went and used the ST80 which is f/5 and closer in aperture (therefore more precise guiding anyway), would I see any advantage?

Below is a 100% crop of my test image on NGC 246 - 45 minutes stacked worth. Slight elongation in the stars which I am attributing to consistent passing clouds leading to very slight tracking errors while the guiding stops while the cloud passes (the mount tracks extremelly well, but of course will likely show minute trailing, especially considering my polar alignment was off by a couple minutes). Regardless, using PHD2 I was getting guiding/tracking continually HALF of the 0.25 inner circle (1/8th of a pixel guiding?)

Just wondering if I can further enhance guiding, WITHOUT using an OAG (I have tried many times using an OAG and just don't like them - just my preference.