[glend (Glen)]

The reason Metaguide works better with high frame rate video cameras lies in its centroid imaging approach which is less susceptible to seeing varibility than longer exposure processes. Think of it as lucky imaging for guiding. With exposures in the ms range Metaguide is continually sampling and mapping the centre of the guide star ( you can see this happening in the guideview window if you watch the red centroid dot), guide corrections do not take place with that frequency, the app is working out the real centre of the star and guide correction timing is under user control. Thus Seeing variability is ironed out and does not lead to false guide commands that are effectively chasing Seeing variances.

Obviously there are many happy PHD2 users, as exhibited by the comments below. My responses are in consideration of your original post about Metaguide. It always happens that whenever Metaguide gets mentioned, people chime in about PHD2; the same thing happens when someone asks about Photoshop processing, which draws the inevitable PI comments. Some folks just want everyone running the same software in the same way, perhaps it validates their choices in some way. There are various ways to achieve similiar, identical, or better results in control and processing. My choices reflect my preferences (having tried various alternatives) and are no less worthy, than anyone elses. I encourage all to make the choices which seems best for you.