Apolo 17 (1972) Hasselblad 500EL | 80 mm | f/2.8 | 1/250 s Vs Artemis II (2026) Nikon D5 | 22 mm | f/2.8 | 1/4 s

by therealdan9999

24 Comments

  1. The 2026 photo was taken at night. The 1972 was taken in the daylight. They aren’t the slightest bit comparable.

  2. Maxthenodule on

    If we’re going to compare them using photographic equipment, we should post the unedited originals.
    The original 1972 photo has much muted colors, and this Artemis photo is almost completely dark.

    And I think the originals are superior in both cases.

  3. LessRespects on

    How bad is the image completely unedited? I know space pictures are edited to look better, but I’m interested in seeing the raw iPhone pics they’re taking up there

  4. It’s fun to think about how there was significantly delayed gratification in the 1972 picture. Sure, they took it, but no one saw it till after landing and developing.

  5. An 80mm at f/2.8 on a medium format Hassy is similar to a ~50mm on 35mm format, with a bokeh equivalent of about 1.4.

  6. Defiant-Ad8065 on

    That Hasselblad with a 70mm medium format film has about 5x more resolution in pixels than the Nikon D5. The D5 has better ISO for that picture, and that’s it. On the same scenario the 1972 camera would do much better.

  7. MentalGravity87 on

    They used a 10 yr old 20.8 MP DSLR camera!? It warms my heart to know my D850 isn’t too outdated.

  8. DaySecure7642 on

    The latest one seems to have a yellowish tint and not as bright and white. Not sure if it is because the old one has too much “touch up”, or the world is really getting more yellowish from e.g. pollution.

  9. Grouchy_Pride_9405 on

    Ehst os this all about? More clouds different angle? Why are these pictures so overrepresented these days?