Nikon D5 order from NASA, again (Page 3): Nikon D200s were used in a climate change documentary where they placed 43 throughout the world in the coldest places on earth. They used them...

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Nikon D200s were used in a climate change documentary where they placed 43 throughout the world in the coldest places on earth. They used them for time lapse captures over several years

Wenonah Loc: Winona, MN

Architect1776 wrote:

Only because they were stuck with a bunch of old crap that no one else wanted. Otherwise they would have gone Sony to save weight that is a premium on every launch with such heavy pieces of outdated junk like the D5 model.

Not to mention the fact that the federal government would have to come up with the money to replace that equipment. Where would they ever come up with that kind of money? I wonder how big of a hit that would be on NASA's budget? Sometimes technology changes and we have to change with it. But I guess not yet.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

sjb3 wrote:

And only seven thousand dollars!

$6496.95

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

SteveR wrote:

Huh? You could just remove the film from ANY camera and leave the camera.

Yes, BUT that is difficult wearing the space suit gloves. The weight carrying capacity of the returning lunar explorer was at a premium and they were not only bringing the film cartridges... remember we are NOT talking 35mm cartridges but 120 or 220 film (rolls which would be difficult to change while on the lunar surface or during EVAs from the space craft).

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

Architect1776 wrote:

Only because they were stuck with a bunch of old crap that no one else wanted. Otherwise they would have gone Sony to save weight that is a premium on every launch with such heavy pieces of outdated junk like the D5 model.

Not true.. Nikon, Canon and Hasselblad have been the premier brands in the photography world for years (and we are talking maintaining compatibility of lenses and other systems). Sony didn't get into serious photography until a few years ago. Prior to that, their primary photography focus was video and not still photography. Besides, everyone knows that the astronauts would be far more able to purchase Nikon or Canon parts from an alien in space than to get Agfa, Panasonic or Sony parts.

chuckster99

Hasselblad used a taxpayers domain to promote their product. If I remember correctly as soon as Hasselblad being used by NASA for the first time , The price of Hasselblad went up significantly. From the distance the cameras were used I suppose it could've been done with a less expensive camera. The Nikon has always been and will continue to be a great camera at a reasonable price and Hasselblad will continue to raise their prices every time a new product is introduced simply due to the fact that it was taken to the moon.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

chuckster99 wrote:

Hasselblad used a taxpayers domain to promote thei... (show quote)

I had the same model of Hasselblad that went to the first moon landing and it DID NOT go up in price cause I bought another one a year later and it was NO MORE than the first one I bought 3 years prior. Sorry.

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

Congratulations to Nikon!!

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

I wonder if Nikon will advertise the fact that D5's were ordered by NASA?

wrangler5 Loc: Missouri

dcampbell52 wrote:

Yes, BUT that is difficult wearing the space suit gloves. The weight carrying capacity of the returning lunar explorer was at a premium and they were not only bringing the film cartridges... remember we are NOT talking 35mm cartridges but 120 or 220 film (rolls which would be difficult to change while on the lunar surface or during EVAs from the space craft).

The lunar Hasselblads used 70mm film, a perforated product with no paper backing that ran between two film cassettes and got 160-200 images per 15 foot roll. (These were available on Earth for many years and can still be found used, along with the necessary film cassettes, but film is scarce and expensive, as are developing tanks for 15 feet of film.) In addition to providing a lot of large images in an electrically driven body with an easily removed film back, the reflex design of the camera allowed (comparatively) easy waist level composition on a fairly large viewing screen while wearing a space helmet. All in all, given the camera, lens and film options available at the time, the Hasselblad package was almost certainly the best tool available given the mission parameters.

al13

BMW, Mercedes and Audi or Chevrolet, Ford or Chrysler. Everyone is entitled to their own choice, doesn't mean one is truly better than another. It's the driver that makes the difference. Nikon was my choice but not because the others were lesser cameras.