Lol, I dont speak for anyone else here, but I have a couple issues with this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5dmPUABing
This could easily explain it, in fact looking at the ISS one, it appears to be zoomed in on a river, is that supposed to be the nile or something?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYM9HBuDc-8
Due to how spheres work, it doesnt matter if your really far away, or really close, your still gonna get a spherical view.
Of course they get a circular view from the ISS. You get a circular view at any altitude. At the low altitudes, the diameter of that circle is only a few kilometers. Far out in space, it approaches the diameter of the planet. NASA has also taken many images of the full earth in the last 43 years. There are many meteorological photos which don't get public attention. One shot that did was when they took shots of the Earth from Cassini, in orbit around Saturn, in 2013. nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia17171.html
Again I think this is all related to the focal length.
People sometimes get confused when talking about this subject, and end up talking about how changing the focal length changes the perspective, and it actually does not. The only time the perspective changes is if you change the distance from your camera to the subject.
If you also change your focal length to maintain the same subject size, you will see a dramatic change in the relationship between the foreground subjects and the elements in the background. If you simply put a camera on a tripod, and without changing the distance to your subject, then shoot a series of images as you zoom in or out, you can crop away the excess image that is captured in the images at wider focal lengths, and you’ll see that the relationship between the main subject and the background will be exactly the same. The perspective itself does not change by changing the focal length alone.
The reason the perspective will change in my example photos, is because I moved closer to my main subject and zoomed out, changing my focal length, to make the the main subject appear the same size in each photograph. When you do this, the relationship between the subject and the background elements changes dramatically, as we’ll see.
So without knowing the exact specifications of the lenses, comparing them is pointless.
With that being said. The tesla photos look fake as hell. And I dont think it was high enough to get a shot of the earth, even with a panoramic camera.
To see the entire Earth at once, you would need to be at a distance where the curvature of the Earth does not obstruct your view. The point at which this happens is known as the "Kármán line," which is located approximately 100 kilometers (62 miles) above sea level. This is often considered the boundary between Earth's atmosphere and outer space.
If you were at this altitude, you would be able to see the entire Earth in one view. This is the height at which the Earth's curvature and the horizon appear as a circle, allowing for a full panoramic view of our planet. This is the altitude at which the Earth's circumference would be visible in its entirety.
In practice, this view is typically achieved by astronauts in spacecraft or satellites in orbit around the Earth. From the International Space Station (ISS), for example, astronauts can see the Earth in its entirety as it orbits the planet at an average altitude of about 420 kilometers (260 miles)
If that were true, then why does the ISS have no pictures of the entire planet. This article claims the opposite!
Most recent Earth photography is from the International Space Station. It is a superb vantage point, with excellent equipment and skilled photographers. But its position in low Earth orbit is just too close to allow photographs of the entire planet. If the Earth were a schoolroom globe, 30 centimetres across, the ISS would be viewing the Earth from less than a centimetre away — far enough to see a curving horizon and the black of space, but not to see the whole Earth. In fact, being so close, it can see just 3% of the Earth’s surface at a time.
To take a portrait of our planet you need to step further back. For example, to geostationary orbit (about 90 times further away) or the Moon (about a thousand times further). From these distances, you can see nearly an entire half of the Earth’s surface at any one time, while remaining close enough for a sharp image.
Someones lying.
I still think space exist, but its prolly not what we think it is.
-edit-
Also, i still think it looks fakes as hell, but your post is misleading. The picture you have is not from 170 km.
https://youtu.be/aBr2kKAHN6M?t=9509
The picture is from after stage 2, which if I understand right. Was at least as far as geostationary orbit, which would make it capable of getting the image with a panoramic camera.
The US Office of Commercial Space Transportation issued the test flight's launch license on February 2, 2018.[28] The rocket lifted off from Launch Complex 39A at Kennedy Space Center[28] at 15:45 EST (20:45 UTC) on February 6.[29] The upper stage supporting the car was initially placed in an Earth parking orbit.[6] It spent six hours coasting through the Van Allen radiation belts, thereby demonstrating a new capability requested by the U.S. Air Force for direct insertion of heavy intelligence satellites into geostationary orbit. Then, the upper stage performed a second boost to reach the desired escape trajectory.[30][31][32]
The launch was live streamed, and video feeds from space showed the Roadster at various angles, with Earth in the background, thanks to cameras placed inside and outside the car, on booms attached to the vehicle's custom adaptor atop the upper stage.[33][34] Musk had estimated the car's battery would last over 12 hours, but the live stream ran for just over four hours, thus ending before the final boost out of Earth orbit
:shrugs:
Lol, I dont speak for anyone else here, but I have a couple issues with this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5dmPUABing
This could easily explain it, in fact looking at the ISS one, it appears to be zoomed in on a river, is that supposed to be the nile or something?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYM9HBuDc-8
Due to how spheres work, it doesnt matter if your really far away, or really close, your still gonna get a spherical view.
Of course they get a circular view from the ISS. You get a circular view at any altitude. At the low altitudes, the diameter of that circle is only a few kilometers. Far out in space, it approaches the diameter of the planet. NASA has also taken many images of the full earth in the last 43 years. There are many meteorological photos which don't get public attention. One shot that did was when they took shots of the Earth from Cassini, in orbit around Saturn, in 2013. nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia17171.html
Again I think this is all related to the focal length.
People sometimes get confused when talking about this subject, and end up talking about how changing the focal length changes the perspective, and it actually does not. The only time the perspective changes is if you change the distance from your camera to the subject.
If you also change your focal length to maintain the same subject size, you will see a dramatic change in the relationship between the foreground subjects and the elements in the background. If you simply put a camera on a tripod, and without changing the distance to your subject, then shoot a series of images as you zoom in or out, you can crop away the excess image that is captured in the images at wider focal lengths, and you’ll see that the relationship between the main subject and the background will be exactly the same. The perspective itself does not change by changing the focal length alone.
The reason the perspective will change in my example photos, is because I moved closer to my main subject and zoomed out, changing my focal length, to make the the main subject appear the same size in each photograph. When you do this, the relationship between the subject and the background elements changes dramatically, as we’ll see.
So without knowing the exact specifications of the lenses, comparing them is pointless.
With that being said. The tesla photos look fake as hell. And I dont think it was high enough to get a shot of the earth, even with a panoramic camera.
To see the entire Earth at once, you would need to be at a distance where the curvature of the Earth does not obstruct your view. The point at which this happens is known as the "Kármán line," which is located approximately 100 kilometers (62 miles) above sea level. This is often considered the boundary between Earth's atmosphere and outer space.
If you were at this altitude, you would be able to see the entire Earth in one view. This is the height at which the Earth's curvature and the horizon appear as a circle, allowing for a full panoramic view of our planet. This is the altitude at which the Earth's circumference would be visible in its entirety.
In practice, this view is typically achieved by astronauts in spacecraft or satellites in orbit around the Earth. From the International Space Station (ISS), for example, astronauts can see the Earth in its entirety as it orbits the planet at an average altitude of about 420 kilometers (260 miles)
If that were true, then why does the ISS have no pictures of the entire planet. This article claims the opposite!
Most recent Earth photography is from the International Space Station. It is a superb vantage point, with excellent equipment and skilled photographers. But its position in low Earth orbit is just too close to allow photographs of the entire planet. If the Earth were a schoolroom globe, 30 centimetres across, the ISS would be viewing the Earth from less than a centimetre away — far enough to see a curving horizon and the black of space, but not to see the whole Earth. In fact, being so close, it can see just 3% of the Earth’s surface at a time.
To take a portrait of our planet you need to step further back. For example, to geostationary orbit (about 90 times further away) or the Moon (about a thousand times further). From these distances, you can see nearly an entire half of the Earth’s surface at any one time, while remaining close enough for a sharp image.
Someones lying.
I still think space exist, but its prolly not what we think it is.