All Hasselblads have top-mounted viewfinder. Always had. Part of the design. You focus by looking down onto the top and adjusting the lens by a barrel ring.
Second, lack of atmosphere IMPROVES photography because there are no molecules to add diffraction between target and camera.
"heliocentrism is pseudoscience!" lolol. Yeah yeah yeah, bring on the flat earth while you're at it. Pretty clear you have little physics, optics, or photography knowledge but you wanna be an Internet expert.
So, can you recommend any good truck stops to eat at? Those long drives can be tough without amphetamines.
I worked for NASA for four years on space projects, analyzed data we got from satellites, also worked on military satellites. You're lunatic fringe or even dedicated site oppo.
Very interesting. A Hasselblad 500EL is then not really a Hasselblad 500 series, as it was so extensively modified. It is purely a custom camera on a Hasselblad frame.
Now, if according to your assertion that the moon landing was filmed in a studio, why the F would NASA bother to charter an expensive camera project if they didn't have to? They could have put a dummy camera on the actors. This is no proof of a studio simulation.
And some of the claims of hoax made in the sterileeye comments section are so plain stupid, showing misunderstanding of vacuum and heat transfer.
All I can say is, they had to figure alot of this stuff out when they started creating spy satellites. Im fairly certain I learned about some of this in highschool history.
Interesting blurb about how the russians used american spy film for their moon sat.
"Let's get it done” ... And I had big doubts about the photographic film that we used - "Type 17" (manufactured by Shostka). For aerial photography it was quite suitable, but for the cosmos a much greater sensitivity was required. I was also afraid that the film would be strongly veiled due to cosmic radiation. What to do? Again bow to NIKFI, with which we were so much in disagreement? Impossible. And time was running out. And then a completely crazy thought occurred to me ...
The photographic equipment used for the balloons was of no interest, but the film, created for shooting from high altitudes, was good: highly sensitive and strongly tanned, with a solution temperature of up to 50 degrees. Just what we need ... And we had it, as they say, buried ... This film I decided to use in the "Yenisei".
We did not know anything. What about the spacecraft? Did the system "lunar" orientation work? Did the camera work? We just waited. And in such moments something always happens. The director of the Crimean Observatory Andrei Borisovich Severny came and said: "What are you waiting for? I figured ... We will not get any picture. To protect the film from cosmic radiation requires a half-meter layer of lead. How many do you have? 5 millimeters. What?!. "It just does not suffice ...
And the fact that we "photographed" the opposite side of the Moon with an American film that was sent to our country with purely spying goals, I told my closest associates only many years later, long after the untimely death of Sergei Pavlovich Korolev. In fifteen years. The abbreviation “AB”, I think, is not necessary to decipher. Of course, this is the "American Balloons". Odessites never lose their sense of humor. Starting with "Vostok" I acted as the chief designer of space television systems. Of course, I perfectly remember the immortal flight of Yuri Alekseevich Gagarin, and everything that followed. But this is another story and completely different adventures.”
If they are faking it, the entire world is in on it.
All Hasselblads have top-mounted viewfinder. Always had. Part of the design. You focus by looking down onto the top and adjusting the lens by a barrel ring.
Second, lack of atmosphere IMPROVES photography because there are no molecules to add diffraction between target and camera.
"heliocentrism is pseudoscience!" lolol. Yeah yeah yeah, bring on the flat earth while you're at it. Pretty clear you have little physics, optics, or photography knowledge but you wanna be an Internet expert.
So, can you recommend any good truck stops to eat at? Those long drives can be tough without amphetamines.
Step aside, folks! I'm a Space Marine Biologist!
I worked for NASA for four years on space projects, analyzed data we got from satellites, also worked on military satellites. You're lunatic fringe or even dedicated site oppo.
I did, and my Opal Kadet caught on fire in the east parking lot at JPL one year.
Wrong
https://sterileeye.com/2009/07/23/the-apollo-11-hasselblad-cameras/
Very interesting. A Hasselblad 500EL is then not really a Hasselblad 500 series, as it was so extensively modified. It is purely a custom camera on a Hasselblad frame.
Now, if according to your assertion that the moon landing was filmed in a studio, why the F would NASA bother to charter an expensive camera project if they didn't have to? They could have put a dummy camera on the actors. This is no proof of a studio simulation.
And some of the claims of hoax made in the sterileeye comments section are so plain stupid, showing misunderstanding of vacuum and heat transfer.
NASA didn't commit to the hoax until roughly the point where Webb quit as director. This is explained in the documentary "American Moon".
All I can say is, they had to figure alot of this stuff out when they started creating spy satellites. Im fairly certain I learned about some of this in highschool history.
Interesting blurb about how the russians used american spy film for their moon sat.
http://www.svengrahn.pp.se/trackind/luna3/SpyBalloon.htm
If they are faking it, the entire world is in on it.