StevenEvan aybe you can see something they can improve on.
Hi Steve (again),
I had looked at my logs too (including old logs from over a year ago) and I don't see a difference in the PHD2 parameters between new and old logs.
The MinMo is too large for a 200mm to 250mm guide scope (and ASI290 pixel size)-- like your log, 0.2 pixels -- but it has always been that large.
For reference, with a 0.2 pixel MinMo, a 211 mm focal length and a ASI174MM guide camera, the hysteresis region -- where no guide correction is even given -- is a whopping +/- 1 arc seconds.
You seem to be using an OAG? (Looks like >2000mm focal length). In which case, MinMo should not be a factor -- the MinMo hysteresis should be somewhere less than 0.1 arc sec with an ASI120.
It may come down to the quality of the image that is given to PHD2 to analyze (unless ASIAIR is the one that took over computing centroids). It can't be coincidental that both of us suffered a factor of 2 worse guiding, and yet, the PHD2 parameters did not change. It is possible that they tried to tweaked PHD2 code in the interrim, but they were swearing that no change was made to guiding code.
In your case, that ASI120MM probably does not help, either. I am also very suspicious of the USB 2 interface in the Mini cameras (their track record with USB 2 is not very good). So I have ordered a USB 3 version ASI290MM to compare with the ASI290MM Mini that I have been using. I dug out an old ASI178MM (also USB 3) a couple of evenings ago, and the guide images looked very clean and stable (don't see star losses), but the FPS from the large sensor when used as a guide camera is never more than 0.5, while I need a FPS of around 2 to track the large periodic error slope from the harmonic drive in the RainbowAstro RST-135.
Chen