Something I'm not sure has been mentioned up to now, is that deep sky imaging is not an instant result. Clicking my own link above, that was 32 images taken of 2 minutes duration each. And that's just the camera time. You will also spend a lot of computation time to get the image out. So imaging in this sense isn't a real time observation. Now, each of the single images taken could be viewed by themselves, but they would be very noisy. This can be partially helped by using a dedicated cooled sensor, and not a regular DSLR camera as I did. Imaging is a hobby in itself. By the way, the times I use are WAY lower than average. Some people will rack up hundreds of hours on the same subject to make the image as good as possible. Compared to others, my earlier image is very low resolution, noisy, and doesn't have as much "depth".
Ok, to try and be constructive, I will admit I had considered building a mount near the roof of my house also. If you're going to remotely control it, I don't think vibration will be that big a deal. Only if you are in the vicinity of the mount will there be much of a problem. This will vary in part, depending on how you image also. I don't tend to do long focal length ("high zoom") stuff, which will show up vibrations even more. For that kinda stuff, I would need an expensive upgrade in optics and a lot more attention to mount setup anyway. Expensive in this case, let's just say the price is in 4 figures (£). The 1st figure is not a 1.
Cooling could also be worked out. If you seal off the top of the house from the rest, and allow it to stabilise with outside, you could reduce the differential. However your house will still remain warmer and likely cause moving air from that regardless. Again, this will be most noticeable at higher zooms, so if you keep it wider it might not be too bad.
Given those factors, a garden observatory might be the less painful option anyway. You can buy domes which will keep unwanted animals out. The top can be motorised and rotate with your optics, and even be set up to self close if it starts raining. Again, this wont be cheap, as the observatory itself will run well into the thousands, before you put any other kit inside it. To keep the costs down, people have modified sheds with a slide-off roof. Again, if you're motivated enough you could make that motorised to save you doing it.
Ok, to try and be constructive, I will admit I had considered building a mount near the roof of my house also. If you're going to remotely control it, I don't think vibration will be that big a deal. Only if you are in the vicinity of the mount will there be much of a problem. This will vary in part, depending on how you image also. I don't tend to do long focal length ("high zoom") stuff, which will show up vibrations even more. For that kinda stuff, I would need an expensive upgrade in optics and a lot more attention to mount setup anyway. Expensive in this case, let's just say the price is in 4 figures (£). The 1st figure is not a 1.
Cooling could also be worked out. If you seal off the top of the house from the rest, and allow it to stabilise with outside, you could reduce the differential. However your house will still remain warmer and likely cause moving air from that regardless. Again, this will be most noticeable at higher zooms, so if you keep it wider it might not be too bad.
Given those factors, a garden observatory might be the less painful option anyway. You can buy domes which will keep unwanted animals out. The top can be motorised and rotate with your optics, and even be set up to self close if it starts raining. Again, this wont be cheap, as the observatory itself will run well into the thousands, before you put any other kit inside it. To keep the costs down, people have modified sheds with a slide-off roof. Again, if you're motivated enough you could make that motorised to save you doing it.