October 23, 2014, 04:47:33 AM

Author Topic: EOS not good for NASA?  (Read 27305 times)

serendipidy

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1324
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #45 on: January 19, 2013, 05:51:17 PM »
I thought it was a dog.  Russian I believe.

The first astronaut was a monkey 8)

You're absolutely correct, my bad :) Laika, a Russian stray dog, was chosen as the occupant of the Soviet spacecraft Sputnik 2 that was launched into orbital outer space on November 3, 1957. She died several hours into the flight.

Albert II, a Rhesus Monkey, became the first monkey in space on June 14, 1949, in a U.S.-launched V2, after the failure of the original Albert's mission on ascent. Albert I reached only 30–39 miles (48–63 km) altitude; Albert II reached about 83 miles (134 km). Albert II died on impact after a parachute failure.These were just suborbital flights, though. The first animal to actually go into orbit was the dog Laika, launched on board the Soviet Sputnik 2 spacecraft on November 3, 1957. Unfortunately, Laika died during the flight.

On July 22, 1951, the Soviet Union launched the R-1 IIIA-1 flight, carrying the dogs Tsygan (Russian: Цыган, "Gypsy") and Dezik (Russian: Дезик) into space, but not into orbit. These two dogs were the first living higher animals successfully recovered from a spaceflight. Both space dogs survived the flight.

Miss Baker, a squirrel monkey, rode a medium-range ballistic missile into suborbital space on May 28, 1959. She returned home safely from her flight into space and has been widely (and incorrectly) credited with being the first living creature to achieve that feat.

The first living higher animals to survive orbital flight were Soviet dogs Belka and Strelka, who survived an August 19, 1960 launch into space.

On January 31, 1961, Ham the Chimp was launched in a Mercury capsule aboard a Redstone rocket. His mission was Mercury-Redstone 2. The chimp had been trained to pull levers to receive rewards of banana pellets and avoid electric shocks. His flight demonstrated the ability to perform tasks during spaceflight. A little over 3 months later the United States sent Alan Shepard into space. Enos the chimp became the first chimpanzee in orbit on November 29, 1961, in another Mercury capsule, an Atlas rocket, Mercury-Atlas 5.

Most of the above copied from Wikipedia.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2013, 06:58:49 PM by serendipidy »
EOS 5D miii, EOS 7D, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS ii, 100-400mmL IS

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #45 on: January 19, 2013, 05:51:17 PM »

Rat

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #46 on: January 19, 2013, 06:12:29 PM »
I hate to be a spoilsport, but according to wikipedia, we're talking a bunch of American flies, back in 1947, by a margin of about 6 miles ::)
Quote
The first animals sent into space were fruit flies aboard a U.S.-launched V-2 rocket on February 20, 1947. The purpose of the experiment was to explore the effects of radiation exposure at high altitudes. The rocket reached 68 miles (109 km) in 3 minutes and 10 seconds, past both the U.S. 50-mile and the international 100 km definitions of the edge of space. The Blossom capsule was ejected and successfully deployed its parachute. The fruit flies were recovered alive.
Fed up with brandism.

jrista

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4468
  • EOL
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #47 on: January 24, 2013, 01:39:08 AM »
When NASA picked up Nikon low-light cameras for use in space, I don't think that, at the time, Canon sensors, metering, or AF systems were actually technologically as good. Today, the 1D X is a stellar camera that outperforms in every way except low-ISO DR...however I don't gather that they use low ISO much in space so that wouldn't be a factor. If NASA were to pick a new brand today, I don't see any reason they wouldn't have chosen the 1D X over the D4, especially given how much of that sweet ultra low light time-lapse photography they do.

But...that's today...Canon's been behind the curve for a while now, and it makes sense that another brand would have been chosen in the past.

wellfedCanuck

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 250
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #48 on: January 26, 2013, 08:28:37 AM »
Chris has an amazing photo album posted on Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/#!/AstronautChrisHadfield
Don't take my advice. Don't even take my advice not to take my advice.

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3355
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #49 on: February 12, 2013, 09:20:44 PM »
But how does one explain some of the pictures taken from the space station with a 1200mm lens?
The best camera is the one in your hands

simonxu11

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 234
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #50 on: February 12, 2013, 10:23:21 PM »
But how does one explain some of the pictures taken from the space station with a 1200mm lens?
Nikon had 1200mm f11 and 1200mm-1700mm f5.6-8

weixing

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #51 on: February 13, 2013, 12:09:25 AM »
Hi,
But how does one explain some of the pictures taken from the space station with a 1200mm lens?
    May be they use a telescope...  ;D

    Anyway, they recent install a modified Celestron CPC 9.25" telescope with Canon 7D DSLR for the ISERV (International Space Station SERVIR Environmental Research and Visualization System) project.


(image source: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/news/iserv.html )

   Have a nice day.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #51 on: February 13, 2013, 12:09:25 AM »

azezal

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #52 on: February 13, 2013, 12:52:39 AM »
Hi,
But how does one explain some of the pictures taken from the space station with a 1200mm lens?
    May be they use a telescope...  ;D

    Anyway, they recent install a modified Celestron CPC 9.25" telescope with Canon 7D DSLR for the ISERV (International Space Station SERVIR Environmental Research and Visualization System) project.


(image source: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/news/iserv.html )

   Have a nice day.



Sorry if I ruined ur post but all I could see was that giant lenscap
Anonymity is a blessing,Ignorance is bliss

weixing

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 309
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #53 on: February 13, 2013, 07:47:12 AM »
Hi,
Sorry if I ruined ur post but all I could see was that giant lenscap
    This is the HyperStar ( http://www.hyperstarimaging.com ) imaging configuration which made the 2350mm F10 telescope to a 540mm F2.3 imaging system.

    Have a nice day.

rlarsen

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #54 on: February 15, 2013, 05:01:09 AM »
I prefer Canon, but Nikon will make a good picture of Uranus.

Bambo

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #55 on: February 15, 2013, 12:08:40 PM »
Hasselblad got in because Wally Shirra walked into a camera store in Cocoa Beach and asked for the best camera possible.   He wanted something to take with him for his first space flight.  The store handed him a Hasselblad and he took it back to the NASA engineers.  Once Hasselblad heard about it, they provided extensive engineering support and the rest is history.  When NASA was looking for 35mm cameras for flight, they approached both Nikon and Canon.  They needed to have the cameras modified to run on dry lubricants and all rubber removed.  Canon said no thanks.  Nikon said they'd do it.  They would stop their production run at the factory and do a special run of "NASA" cameras.  On top of that, they provided complete access to their engineering technology so NASA could integrate special modifications for space flight.   Canon never offered that and refused when asked.  Over time NASA has built up quite an inventory of Nikon lenses making it very expensive to switch to Canon.  With that said, NASA uses Canon XF305 video cameras and that is the prime video camera on the International Space Station (NASA now uses off the shelf items since the hardware requirements for ISS operation are more relaxed than that of Apollo and shuttle - bigger vehicle).
5DIII, 5DII, S95, 17-40mm f/4L, 40mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, 100mm f2.8 Macro, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, 300mm f/4L IS, Flash 580EX & 420EX & ST-E2

brad goda

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #56 on: February 15, 2013, 11:26:53 PM »
they fly on the lowest bidder...
whats the question? lol

Hobby Shooter

  • Guest
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #57 on: February 16, 2013, 12:13:18 AM »
I prefer Canon, but Nikon will make a good picture of Uranus.
My what?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #57 on: February 16, 2013, 12:13:18 AM »

brad goda

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #58 on: February 16, 2013, 12:39:09 AM »
I prefer Canon, but Nikon will make a good picture of Uranus.
My what?

Like I said they fly on the lowest bugger... ;D :o LOL

elhajj33

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #59 on: February 19, 2013, 11:33:07 AM »
Are you sure about NASA not using EOS?  I photographed the VAB and Endeavour while it was being decommissioned and I have photos of KSC's photo editor Ken Thornsley walking around with 2 canon crops and a 10-22.

I wonder if it's just different folks at NASA using various bits of gear.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EOS not good for NASA?
« Reply #59 on: February 19, 2013, 11:33:07 AM »