Think you're getting some excellent advice here. I'd still recommend a center-balanced equatorial if you're concerned about weight, a CEM40 head is 15 pounds.
I have yet to see actual iGuider performance numbers. But it couldn't be simpler than a scope and camera built into the mount -- IF you're going to have a computer all the time anyway. Then the iGuider would likely be a good choice up through 400mm or so. If you go longer, the iGuider scope (120mm f/l)
might not suffice -- note that the SVBONY Scotty recommends has a 270mm f/l! Longer is not necessarily always better, since mo' mag means less FOV and fewer available stars to guide on. And the guiders work at a sub-pixel level. But at some point, a discrepancy that a short scope can't notice is enough to mess up the longer scope's image. Heh. For plenty of folks, a "guide" scope is 80mm -- bigger than my imaging scope!
All that said, if you can figure out a decent mount for it, it's hard to go wrong with a cheap-but-adequate scope and an MGEN. This fellow found
a cheap bracket to do the job. The bane of guidescope setups is differential flexure, you'd want to be sure that you've got something pretty rigid.
Edited to add: Duh. You said "1.4X converter" right up front. I have no data to back this up, mind you, but 120mm starts to sound a little short to guide that.