ONIKKINEN

There are quite a few very obvious hot pixels in the screenshot, although its hard to tell without seeing the actual frame itself if its an issue or not. DSS is not quite scrolled far enough right to see the important parts of the frames = FWHM and number of stars. If all frames have a similar amount of stars it should be stackable, but if all frames have a very low FWHM im willing to bet DSS is counting your hot pixels as stars instead of the actual stars. This would lead to the images being un-alignable and so DSS will only stack 1 frame. You can check what DSS considers as stars by clicking the "edit stars" button. Just thinking aloud, but If you used the C9.25 and the 533 for the image, which seems likely based on the scale of M51 on the screen and the square format, you would be oversampling by at least a factor of 2, probably 3 or more. This makes the hot pixels look more like stars to DSS than the actual very spread out low SNR stars in the image. If this is the case im not sure how to fix it. If you have AHD interpolation on in the RAW/FITS settings in DSS try setting it to Bilinear or super pixel and see if things change. I dont find it that odd that there would be only 16 stars in the image though, since its such a small field of view.

From the device manager screenshot it looks like everything is as it should be. So just to reiterate: USB to MC, HC not plugged in. From EQMOD select the HEQ5 option (no EQ3 option available) and set its COM port to 4. This may be auto detected as well. Try a BAUD of 115200 and 9600. One of them should work.

Options: USB to HC, No EQMOD USB to MC, no HC, Yes EQMOD FDTI serial cable to the HC port on the MC, no HC, no USB, yes EQMOD. Click on the properties and see if there is an error. This looks correct by the way and it seems you have the GL chip that needs the newer drivers. And looks like you have them or it wouldnt be recognized.

I would recommend this for secondary collimation: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/other-collimation-tools/ts-concenter-2-adjustment-eyepiece-for-newtonian-telescopes.html Very easy to use and you can immediately see where the problem is. You dont mention what telescope it is, or what focuser you have (if you changed it) but if its a stock newtonian and not of a premium quality the focuser is probably not perfect. If you have any slop in your focuser it wont matter how much you collimate the scope because the camera position is not reproducible and so collimation changes depending on where you point in the sky or some other trivial reason. You also dont mention what camera you have as there could be another reason for it, like shutter shadow if using a DSLR with a physical shutter. Unless you post a raw flat these are just guesses, but collimation is a pretty good guess whether related to actual collimation or focuser slop.

Can you post a raw flat frame, rotated and not? Not sure i understand the issue but would like to have a look if possible.

Try the other Prolific driver?

Have you downloaded and installed the drivers? The lower one in this page(not the synscan app one). I think you have since you have the Skywatcher telescope option in the diagnostics tool but just checking. https://skywatcher.com/download/software/ascom-driver/ Also the Prolific USB-to serial drivers. (The second download here) https://skywatcher.com/download/software/accessories/ But could be that your unit needs different drivers. I actually recently received a brand new Skywatcher mount (AZ-EQ6) that did not work with the above prolific drivers. No matter what i did the mount USB or handset USB was not detected by any piece of software and i had no control. It was visible as a COM port but just not functional. Looks like Skywatcher have started using a new version of the prolific serial chip somewhere on the mount and have just not updated their own site. I downloaded drivers here: http://www.prolific.com.tw/US/ShowProduct.aspx?p_id=225&pcid=41 and now USB control methods work just fine. Maybe give it a try? Its really strange that some mounts work with some drivers and some mounts work with others, kinda embarrassing how bad the situation in something as simple and crucial as a cable connection can be...

Lots of good tips here already, but ill throw my 2 cents on the computer control subject. Mini-PC running windows 10 is the best deal. You get all the bonuses of running a windows machine on the field but none of the negatives from laptops (bulk, battery life). Any gear you have is guaranteed to be compatible, not just a select few models (like with the ASIAIR) or a select few pieces of software (raspberry). You can run NINA/APT, sharpcap, firecapture, full version of PHD2, proprietary brand specific capture software. You could even process quickly on the go with DSS/Siril and see what youre getting after some subs have rolled in. This is also probably cheaper than the ASIAIR. Negatives: preferably controlled with a tablet. Phone control possible but annoying. Some tinkering and initial setup required so not for complete tech-allergic people.

The way you have the scope set up now is called the "home position" of an equatorial mount. RA (Right ascension) axis and with it the counterweight shaft at its lowest position and the other axis, DEC (Declination) axis at its highest position. With the mounts axis at this position, try to get Polaris to the center of the eyepiece. Do not touch either of the axis, but do left-right movements by rotating the entire mount on the tripod (have the bolt a bit loose) and adjusting the up-down axis with the latitude adjustment screw. The latitude gauge should be initially at your locations latitude but dont be surprised if you still need adjusting afterwards. When Polaris is centered, tighten the tripod bolt. Once done, do not move the tripod or rotate the mount on the tripod anymore, all movements with the mount will happen with the RA/DEC slow motion controls or by loosening the clutches and manually pointing the scope. This mount has no polarscope so the polar alignment routine is quite basic and inaccurate. Dont worry about it too much, just get it thereabouts correct. I usually did not bother trying to get Polaris in the eyepiece but just pointed the mount towards Polaris and set the latitude to my sites latitude, but it will be easier to point the scope afterwards if you do it more accurately. Now finding objects will be a bit tricky with this kind of mount but the way i did it was to manually point the scope to a bright star (using the red dot) near the object i tried to find and then by using the slow control knobs moved the scope bit by bit until i found it. It will be confusing because left-right in real life is not necessarily left-right in the eyepiece because the view is mirrored and could be at an odd angle. And of coursr how would you know where anything is? For that i would recommend a planetarium app like Stellarium. In stellarium you can toggle on the setting to "show equatorial grid" (one of the buttons) to get an idea how the movements of your RA or DEC axis move along the sky.

@vlaivs suggestions are sound IMO. The skywatcher 130PDS is perhaps the cheapest entry level scope to buy and mount that has use both visually and photographically. I think you could mount one on an EQ3 but it wont be fun and you will want to upgrade the mount soon. I would aim for the EQ5 myself. The best option, one that you wouldnt have to regret later would in my opinion to save up first instead of buying lacking gear now and then saving. But for visual only you can get a nice scope for around 500. The heritage 150P, a dobsonian is a popular first scope for 320e : https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p12279_Skywatcher-Dobson-Telescope-Heritage-150P-Flextube---150-mm-Aperture.html That leaves some money for upgraded eyepieces and extra trinkets. Dobsonians are manual mount/telescope combos in one so tracked long exposure will not be happening with one, but you could image the Moon with it.

Whats your budget? Astrophotography is very expensive, so this has to be said before advice can be given. But looking at the list of gear you have laid out its not a good look for telescope astronomy. Out of these your best bet would be the SW star adventurer and maybe a lens for your existing camera. Or the EQ3-2 with GO-TO and hook your camera + lens to that with a few adapters in between, but the EQ3-2 is also not really future proof . This rules out most of the items in the list, except for maybe the star adventurer. But the star adventurer is also limited in capacity and really shouldn't be used with gear other than a camera + lens or a small telescope. The EQ-2 class of mounts are un-usable for astrophotography, and honestly a bit painful to use for visual too. The reason you also see many EQ3 class mounts for sale is that they are not wanted, and also mostly unsuitable for astrophotography. You can image with an EQ3 class mount but the telescope would have to be small and still there would be trouble ahead. The nexstar 127 is the closest to a telescope you could use for imaging and visual, but this being a maksutov is also limited in its usage as a photography telescope. Not impossible but you will have a small field of view and will get quite small resolution images in the end. But for smaller objects out there it could be used. Also for planetary and lunar photography it would work great, although preferably with another camera. The 76mm newtonians dont have a good rep and the pentaflex is being sold for 20e for a good reason = the owner just wants to get rid of it. Not a telescope you want to have for visual or astrophotography.

I would at first glance agree with the above, that there are too many alignment points. But if the same happens with an AP size of 312 this is really weird. This is what my settings look like and no such issues happen. Image Stabilization set to surface as that is meant for lunar recordings and the improved tracking selected. Dont know what the improved tracking thing does, but cant hurt right?

My ideal darksite would be a clearing in the middle of a forest with maybe a dirt road as the surface for less thermals and still giving plenty of support for tripods (as opposed to just the forest floor which is soggy and tripods sink into this). The trees provide shelter from wind, but also could cause worse seeing if there is turbulence straight above. But seeing is not that great usually anyway so whatever, ill just deal with it. It would also be at least 70km away from where i live (a major LP source) and be accessible by car in less than 30min. Now the last part makes this pure fantasy, but that would be ideal for me. I can think of many B4-5 or even B3 areas with the above criteria, maybe even some B2 ones. But all are at least 90min away so not something i could use on weeknights. On weekends maybe if the forecast is solid and there is little risk of a wasted trip, but usually such weather only happens when a proper high pressure zone is straight overhead, and that is unfortunately very rare outside of spring and summer here.

I have to disagree, dithering is one of the most important things to do. Perhaps even more important than guiding IMO. Walking noise is something you cant really get rid of if it gets too bad due to not dithering enough.

Temperature can indeed effect where the mount binds, especially if the temperature difference is large between when the mount was adjusted and when it was used. The RA axis on my EQM35 also experienced binding even though i had adjusted it as accurately as i could. Temperature difference at the time was about 30 degrees, so not even as large as it could be. I just quickly touched the adjustment screws a bit to free the axis, but i guess you could just do the backlash adjustment outside to get rid of this issue too.

Might be the resolution. Check your task manager if Registax is actually doing anything at all, it may have already crashed. I am not able to do anything in Registax with a picture bigger than 3000x3000 due to its memory limitations.

I ziptied the standard VESA mount bracket that came with my mini-pc to the tripod spreader of my EQM35. I can just quickly snap the mini-pc in place and out if needed. Its also close enough to the scope that cable snags are no issue.

My camera has been very much plug and play (IMX571 from touptek/risingcam) since i got it. No issues with calibration frames, no amp glow, no fuss about settings. Default offset, default gain in high gain mode and thats about it. Any exposure length over 10s will swamp read noise completely in my typical conditions so why sweat it more than that? More of these less than ideal results from CMOS cameras compared to CCD cameras could be due to much lower costs involved. The CCD cameras i have looked at for sale have been all extremely expensive, far beyond the typical "just getting into this bit by bit" type of imager. But many of these CMOS cameras are comparable in price to an overpriced smart phone, and not that much of a stretch for many i believe so it could be that there are a lot more beginners out there compared to CCD days.

You are probably overthinking it. At 5 minutes your read noise really doesn't matter anymore, although i would still choose to have a lower one (and shorter subs). If you start saturating stars too much the solution seems simple = shorter subs so they are not saturated. Difficult to say why you have more noise than you think you should, but outside a direct comparison between CCD X and CMOS Y this will be difficult to tell. Looking at the histogram is not that helpful for capture IMO. As long as its not clipped its OK. And black clipping is dealt with an appropriate offset value so that even bias frames cannot contain 0-value pixels. White clipping is dealt with lowering gain or shortening the exposure. If there is signal, it doesn't matter where in the histogram it is if its not clipped.

If you want the image to need less stretching, then maybe up the gain? But not sure i get the problem still. You can have as low as 40 electrons of median signal per pixel and still get a decent image when enough of them are stacked together. Speaking from experience on that one, my stacked images usually have a median ADU value of 120-150. My images still contain noise because they do not have enough integration, but the solution for that seems self explanatory = i just need more integration. By the way, did you image on a mono camera before? I would imagine even a modest mono CCD would steal beat modern CMOS OSC cameras in terms of noise and speed of capture.

Why does it matter what a single sub looks like stretched or not? If the photons are there they will be separable from noise when stacked.

Not released yet. But looks like its in the works and we should expect to see it one day. This tweet from a month ago: https://twitter.com/AtikCameras/status/1473712396900438018?cxt=HHwWhMC45b3n1vMoAAAA

Just as a lurker in many threads about calibration i have noticed that the 294 is often the camera in question when someone has a calibration issue. Maybe this particular sensor is more temperamental than others from the bag of available CMOS sensors? Could it have something to do with the native pixel size being 2.32 microns and the OSC version is binned 2x2 by default? At least thats what i think is going on, the mono version of the sensor has an unlockable BIN1 mode where the actual pixel size of 2.32 is used instead of the OSC 4.64.

Photoshop has auto color and auto tone features aswell, these have worked on Lunar and Planetary for me so far. The downside is that they introduce clipping, specifically 0.10% of blacks and whites are clipped. You can run the same tool without the clipping introduced by using it from the Curves menu. Click options and you get the auto color correction options menu pop up. Do Enhance per channel contrast with 0 and 0 for clipping and then do the find dark and light colors with 0 and 0 for clipping. Almost every time the colourbalance turns out nice afterwards.

Found another gem. These are clearly the best telescopes for beginners out there, i mean it says so in the video! (affiliate links down below, please buy so we get paid) Also i find it funny that this video is titled for 2022 but was released in december of 2020 😂. These used to be easy to spot as nonsense by just looking at the amount of dislikes on the video, but since YouTube removed the feature to show dislikes to viewers, these are harder to spot for newbies.