Nikons on Artemis II
p.2 #1Nikons on Artemis II
Thanks for that. Also available here, with some additional images. (that eclipse photo with the Z9 is absolutely incredible):
https://images.nasa.gov
https://images.nasa.gov
Apr 07, 2026 at 07:59 AM
p.2 #2Nikons on Artemis II
Jman13 wrote:
Thanks for that. Also available here, with some additional images. (that eclipse photo with the Z9 is absolutely incredible):
https://images.nasa.gov
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009301/art002e009301~large.jpg
2 s @ f/2, 1600 ISO, with AF 35/2D (manual focused) ...
I would have used different shooting parameters, DxO PureRaw 5 (and my Voigt 35/2 Apo
).
Thanks for that. Also available here, with some additional images. (that eclipse photo with the Z9 is absolutely incredible):
https://images.nasa.gov
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009301/art002e009301~large.jpg
2 s @ f/2, 1600 ISO, with AF 35/2D (manual focused) ...
I would have used different shooting parameters, DxO PureRaw 5 (and my Voigt 35/2 Apo
).Apr 07, 2026 at 09:58 AM
p.2 #4Nikons on Artemis II
fjablo wrote:
Is he manually focusing the AF-D 35mm f2 in that image? Nikon where is our FTZ adapter with built-in screwdrive motor?!!
Isn't that the most pitiable thing you ever saw? An honest-to-goodness astronaut, in a machine that cost billions, further from Earth than any human in history... stuck manually focusing his Z9 in space because Nikon won't do an AF adapter!
But really, these photos are awesome.
n8rv wrote:
Whew! This one might be my favorite so far
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009287/art002e009287~medium.jpg
Too cool!
Blakehfreeman wrote
Does appear, as discussed, the Z9 made the journey as well…Isn't that the most pitiable thing you ever saw? An honest-to-goodness astronaut, in a machine that cost billions, further from Earth than any human in history... stuck manually focusing his Z9 in space because Nikon won't do an AF adapter!
But really, these photos are awesome.
n8rv wrote:
Whew! This one might be my favorite so far
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009287/art002e009287~medium.jpg
Too cool!
Apr 07, 2026 at 10:19 AM
p.2 #5Nikons on Artemis II
n8rv wrote:
Whew! This one might be my favorite so far
Awesome!
Whew! This one might be my favorite so far
Awesome!
Apr 07, 2026 at 10:23 AM
p.2 #6Nikons on Artemis II
Yeah this is the one I chose for my main desktop wallpaper. Incredible shot. I wonder if they will release raw files once they’re back on earth.
n8rv wrote:
Whew! This one might be my favorite so far
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009287/art002e009287~medium.jpg
n8rv wrote:
Whew! This one might be my favorite so far
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009287/art002e009287~medium.jpg
Apr 07, 2026 at 10:41 AM
p.2 #7Nikons on Artemis II
m.sommers00 wrote:
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!
Which ISO? Both those cameras have a range of selectable ISO settings.
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!
Which ISO? Both those cameras have a range of selectable ISO settings.
Apr 07, 2026 at 10:53 AM
p.2 #8Nikons on Artemis II
ilkka_nissila wrote:
Indeed the D5 high ISO image quality is better than Z9. The difference between D6 and D5 is small though, but as the D5 is a bit slower it is a tiny bit less noisy.
Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
I think it also has to do with being able to see the true color of celestial objects through the viewfinder.
Indeed the D5 high ISO image quality is better than Z9. The difference between D6 and D5 is small though, but as the D5 is a bit slower it is a tiny bit less noisy.
Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
m.sommers00 wrote
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!I think it also has to do with being able to see the true color of celestial objects through the viewfinder.
Apr 07, 2026 at 11:12 AM
RoamingScott
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.2 #9Nikons on Artemis II
Wezre wrote:
Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
I think it also has to do with being able to see the true color of celestial objects through the viewfinder.
If that were true the Z9 wouldn't have been chosen as the HULC. It's simply time intensive and costly to certify a camera for use and the D5 is the current certified workhorse.
ilkka_nissila wrote
Indeed the D5 high ISO image quality is better than Z9. The difference between D6 and D5 is small though, but as the D5 is a bit slower it is a tiny bit less noisy.Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
m.sommers00 wrote
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!If that were true the Z9 wouldn't have been chosen as the HULC. It's simply time intensive and costly to certify a camera for use and the D5 is the current certified workhorse.
Apr 07, 2026 at 11:15 AM
p.2 #10Nikons on Artemis II
fjablo wrote:
Also here: https://images.nasa.gov/
This one was taken with the Z9 and the AF-D 35mm:
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009301/art002e009301~large.jpg
Weird that we posted almost the exact same thing at the same time (though you beat me to the submit button...I didn't realize until now because mine started a new page.
RoamingScott wrote
The full res files are being posted to NASA Johnson's Flickr here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2explore/This one was taken with the Z9 and the AF-D 35mm:
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009301/art002e009301~large.jpg
Weird that we posted almost the exact same thing at the same time (though you beat me to the submit button...I didn't realize until now because mine started a new page.
Apr 07, 2026 at 11:27 AM
|
p.2 #11Nikons on Artemis II
m.sommers00 wrote:
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!
The D5 does record more dynamic range compared to the D6. The Z9 has a larger amount up until about 1200 ISO then the D series gains the upper hand. It doesn't seem to be a massive difference either way. My guess is they chose the Nikon body with max dynamic range at settings the astronauts typically use in space.
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D6,Nikon%20Z%209
PetaPixel as an additional article (different from the OP's link) speaking to this specifically.
The 10-Year-Old Nikon D5 DSLR Really Is the Best Camera for Artemis II
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!
The D5 does record more dynamic range compared to the D6. The Z9 has a larger amount up until about 1200 ISO then the D series gains the upper hand. It doesn't seem to be a massive difference either way. My guess is they chose the Nikon body with max dynamic range at settings the astronauts typically use in space.
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D6,Nikon%20Z%209
PetaPixel as an additional article (different from the OP's link) speaking to this specifically.
The 10-Year-Old Nikon D5 DSLR Really Is the Best Camera for Artemis II
Apr 07, 2026 at 02:24 PM
p.2 #12Nikons on Artemis II
RoamingScott wrote:
Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
I think it also has to do with being able to see the true color of celestial objects through the viewfinder.If that were true the Z9 wouldn't have been chosen as the HULC.
What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell it looks like one of the lenses for the HULC - and maybe *the* lens that will go to the surface of the moon and succeed the mighty Zeiss Distagon 60mm - is the humble Nikon 40mm f2
I really love the pragmatism that is apparent with these images. The gear is old, the lenses are not really the best, they stop down well into diffraction territory, some of the shots are a bit blurry.. yet none of it matters one bit.
Contrast that with some threads here where you’ll find the most boring ass pictures taken with vastly more capable gear. And people discussing lenses as if it were impossible to take images without buying the latest and greatest stuff. Just puts things in perspective imo
Wezre wrote
ilkka_nissila wrote
Indeed the D5 high ISO image quality is better than Z9. The difference between D6 and D5 is small though, but as the D5 is a bit slower it is a tiny bit less noisy.Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
m.sommers00 wrote
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell it looks like one of the lenses for the HULC - and maybe *the* lens that will go to the surface of the moon and succeed the mighty Zeiss Distagon 60mm - is the humble Nikon 40mm f2
I really love the pragmatism that is apparent with these images. The gear is old, the lenses are not really the best, they stop down well into diffraction territory, some of the shots are a bit blurry.. yet none of it matters one bit.
Contrast that with some threads here where you’ll find the most boring ass pictures taken with vastly more capable gear. And people discussing lenses as if it were impossible to take images without buying the latest and greatest stuff. Just puts things in perspective imo
Apr 07, 2026 at 02:57 PM
p.2 #13Nikons on Artemis II
It’s really just the certification process. The D5 is fully certified and the Z9 is not. Other articles mentioned that Nikon was still working on radiation hardened circuits for the Artemis III Z9 cert package. They were able to sneak one on to play with but the trusted workhorses this time are the D5’s.
Vic Fontaine wrote:
The D5 does record more dynamic range compared to the D6. The Z9 has a larger amount up until about 1200 ISO then the D series gains the upper hand. It doesn't seem to be a massive difference either way. My guess is they chose the Nikon body with max dynamic range at settings the astronauts typically use in space.
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D6,Nikon%20Z%209
PetaPixel as an additional article (different from the OP's link) speaking to this specifically.
The 10-Year-Old Nikon D5 DSLR Really Is the Best Camera for Artemis II
Vic Fontaine wrote:
m.sommers00 wrote
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D5,Nikon%20D6,Nikon%20Z%209
PetaPixel as an additional article (different from the OP's link) speaking to this specifically.
The 10-Year-Old Nikon D5 DSLR Really Is the Best Camera for Artemis II
Apr 07, 2026 at 04:02 PM
p.2 #14Nikons on Artemis II
jpelt78 wrote:
It’s really just the certification process. The D5 is fully certified and the Z9 is not. Other articles mentioned that Nikon was still working on radiation hardened circuits for the Artemis III Z9 cert package. They were able to sneak one on to play with but the trusted workhorses this time are the D5’s.
Makes sense, thanks!
It’s really just the certification process. The D5 is fully certified and the Z9 is not. Other articles mentioned that Nikon was still working on radiation hardened circuits for the Artemis III Z9 cert package. They were able to sneak one on to play with but the trusted workhorses this time are the D5’s.
Makes sense, thanks!
Apr 07, 2026 at 04:17 PM
p.2 #15Nikons on Artemis II
You know you’re right. If I spent as much time flying around distant celestial objects in my rocket ship as I do agonizing about gear on this forum I’d finally have a gallery worth a damn! :-)
fjablo wrote:
Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
I think it also has to do with being able to see the true color of celestial objects through the viewfinder.If that were true the Z9 wouldn't have been chosen as the HULC.What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell it looks like one of the lenses for the HULC - and maybe *the* lens that will go to the surface of the moon and succeed the mighty Zeiss Distagon 60mm - is the humble Nikon 40mm f2
I really love the pragmatism that is apparent with these images. The gear is old, the lenses are not really the best, they stop down well into diffraction territory, some of the shots are a bit blurry.. yet none of it matters one bit.
Contrast that with some threads here where you’ll...Show more →
fjablo wrote:
RoamingScott wrote
Wezre wrote
ilkka_nissila wrote
Indeed the D5 high ISO image quality is better than Z9. The difference between D6 and D5 is small though, but as the D5 is a bit slower it is a tiny bit less noisy.Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
m.sommers00 wrote
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!I really love the pragmatism that is apparent with these images. The gear is old, the lenses are not really the best, they stop down well into diffraction territory, some of the shots are a bit blurry.. yet none of it matters one bit.
Contrast that with some threads here where you’ll...Show more →
Apr 07, 2026 at 06:21 PM
p.2 #16Nikons on Artemis II
v5planet wrote:
You know you’re right. If I spent as much time flying around distant celestial objects in my rocket ship as I do agonizing about gear on this forum I’d finally have a gallery worth a damn! :-)
Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
I think it also has to do with being able to see the true color of celestial objects through the viewfinder.If that were true the Z9 wouldn't have been chosen as the HULC.What’s interesting is that as far as I can tell it looks like one of the lenses for the HULC - and maybe *the* lens that will go to the surface of the moon and succeed the mighty Zeiss Distagon 60mm - is the humble Nikon 40mm f2
I really love the pragmatism that is apparent with these images. The gear is old, the lenses are not really the best, they stop down well into diffraction territory, some of the shots are a bit blurry.. yet none of it matters one bit.
Contrast that with some threads here where you’ll find the most boring ass pictures taken with vastly more capable gear. And people discussing lenses as if it were impossible to take images without buying the latest and greatest stuff. Just puts things in perspective imo
“If you want to be a better photographer, stand in front of more interesting stuff.” - Jim Richardson
(not sure if he really ever said it, as usual with these quotes..)
You know you’re right. If I spent as much time flying around distant celestial objects in my rocket ship as I do agonizing about gear on this forum I’d finally have a gallery worth a damn! :-)
fjablo wrote
RoamingScott wrote
Wezre wrote
ilkka_nissila wrote
Indeed the D5 high ISO image quality is better than Z9. The difference between D6 and D5 is small though, but as the D5 is a bit slower it is a tiny bit less noisy.Most likely the main reason they are using the D5 is because it has been tested more in space. But of course it is a high ISO optimized camera and the Z9 is a versatile all-rounder.
m.sommers00 wrote
I have to wonder what the rationale was for this. Is the ISO performance of the D5 better than the Z9? Why D5 and not D6?!I really love the pragmatism that is apparent with these images. The gear is old, the lenses are not really the best, they stop down well into diffraction territory, some of the shots are a bit blurry.. yet none of it matters one bit.
Contrast that with some threads here where you’ll find the most boring ass pictures taken with vastly more capable gear. And people discussing lenses as if it were impossible to take images without buying the latest and greatest stuff. Just puts things in perspective imo
“If you want to be a better photographer, stand in front of more interesting stuff.” - Jim Richardson
(not sure if he really ever said it, as usual with these quotes..)
Apr 07, 2026 at 11:59 PM
p.2 #18Nikons on Artemis II
Ripolini wrote:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/article/photo-research-richardson
Stunning pics from Artemis II. Admittedly this reply is a bit off-topic but it relates to the subject in an oblique sort of way.
In that quote Mr. Richardson is saying that to lift a very heavy object you have to be really strong. Well, yeah. The problem for most of us is that we can't stand, figuratively or literally, on the far side of the moon. We are stuck in more down-to-earth locations, often in our home towns or neighborhoods or other places our spouses, finances, vehicles, and feet will let us visit. So we look around for sights we see but don't see. You don't have to go to Skellig Michael or even the moon to find interesting subjects. You do have to keep your eyes open.
Of course Mr. Richardson is on target about doing your homework. If you're going through all the trouble to visit Skellig Michael or the moon it would be stupid not to be as prepared mentally as you are with your equipment.
I'd love to get photographs like those! What's the earliest reservation I can get for a trip to the moon?
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/article/photo-research-richardson
Stunning pics from Artemis II. Admittedly this reply is a bit off-topic but it relates to the subject in an oblique sort of way.
In that quote Mr. Richardson is saying that to lift a very heavy object you have to be really strong. Well, yeah. The problem for most of us is that we can't stand, figuratively or literally, on the far side of the moon. We are stuck in more down-to-earth locations, often in our home towns or neighborhoods or other places our spouses, finances, vehicles, and feet will let us visit. So we look around for sights we see but don't see. You don't have to go to Skellig Michael or even the moon to find interesting subjects. You do have to keep your eyes open.
Of course Mr. Richardson is on target about doing your homework. If you're going through all the trouble to visit Skellig Michael or the moon it would be stupid not to be as prepared mentally as you are with your equipment.
I'd love to get photographs like those! What's the earliest reservation I can get for a trip to the moon?
Apr 08, 2026 at 04:11 AM
p.2 #19Nikons on Artemis II
jimmuller wrote:
Admittedly this reply is a bit off-topic but it relates to the subject in an oblique sort of way.
This is a reply to the post immediately above:
fjablo wrote:
“If you want to be a better photographer, stand in front of more interesting stuff.” - Jim Richardson
(not sure if he really ever said it, as usual with these quotes..)
Admittedly this reply is a bit off-topic but it relates to the subject in an oblique sort of way.
This is a reply to the post immediately above:
fjablo wrote:
“If you want to be a better photographer, stand in front of more interesting stuff.” - Jim Richardson
(not sure if he really ever said it, as usual with these quotes..)
Apr 08, 2026 at 04:38 AM
p.2 #20Nikons on Artemis II
I've been shooting Nikon exclusively since 1984 (that may change); back then, my final decision was based on the fact that it was the brand NASA used most in space.
Hasselblad was used too.
This from Ai: NASA left 12 Hasselblad camera bodies on the Moon's surface during the Apollo missions (11 through 17) to save weight for returning moon rock samples.
And astronaut Michael Collins lost a Hasselblad in space during the Gemini 10 mission in 1966 when it drifted away during a space walk.
Robert
Edited on Apr 08, 2026 at 06:46 AM · View previous versions
Hasselblad was used too.
This from Ai: NASA left 12 Hasselblad camera bodies on the Moon's surface during the Apollo missions (11 through 17) to save weight for returning moon rock samples.
And astronaut Michael Collins lost a Hasselblad in space during the Gemini 10 mission in 1966 when it drifted away during a space walk.
Robert
Edited on Apr 08, 2026 at 06:46 AM · View previous versions
Apr 08, 2026 at 06:37 AM