Thanks all
Yeap - wish I had a bigger chip, but not at the sacrifice of sensitivity
I'm keen to re-process this guy tonight. I posted it from home then when I got to work I looked at it and thought "hmm, there's less exposure detail in that than my 2 minute shots from last year, something is wrong". I put it down to my newbie status with regard to RGB imaging. It could also be because the atmosphere was very turbulent last night so the clarity/resolution isn't so good and so the image would be fainter as a result too.
Tracking - thanks, I am quite happy with it. The secret for my setup is good PEC and fast guiding and good guide star contrast. My guide exposures were 1 second with a brightness of about 2000 ADU. Compare that to the NGC 1232 shot where I had 10 second guide exposures with 400 ADU - big difference in tracking accuracy simply because it would have been making incorrect and unneccessary movements much of the time. The PEC on my LX200 (classic) has got my PE down to something increadably low - I haven't measured it but without autoguiding at worst my stars end up oval shaped, not lines - so thinking about the image scale that must be about 2 arc seconds of PE. I'm often amazed at the class of this now relatively old instrument, that it can track that accurately.
Roger.