Joined on Mar 27, 2013


Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10
In reply to:

nicolaim: The ISS has a crew of 3, so I'd like to know why each astronaut needs 17 of these cameras...
I don't know how many they're actually sending to the ISS, but the cost to transport the cameras into space is roughly as much as the price of the cameras.

Actually, there are generally 6 people up there. They travel up and down in 3-person capsules. When a new crew arrives, the oldest crew departs.

And the lenses, about 30 of them, are already on board. All Nikon. Things happen fast when you move more than 17,000 MPH, so each camera is mounted to one lens.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 22:59 UTC
In reply to:

matthew saville: At $9,100 to $43,000 to transport 1 LB of gear into space, anybody going to calculate how much NASA could have saved by ordering Sony A9's instead?

A few million, I'd wager?

The guys on the iSS are NOT photographers, but scientists and engineers. They spend most of their time ensuring they keep circling the earth, breathing, and not freezing, plus running experiments, so photography is a small side line for them. They want one model of camera for simplicity. I know they use D3's (seen in pictures from the ISS), so they are just changing to D5's.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 22:49 UTC
In reply to:

cosinaphile: nasa spreading the nikon love ....

Canon grey fluorite lenses cannot pass the tests-too much stress and vibration from launch.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 22:46 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: It would be interesting to know why they choose those heavy D5 instead of a new D850. Resolution should be more important than weathersealing or speed ;)

D850 not even out yet. They need reliability. They already use primarily D3's, just time to upgrade.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 22:37 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Since their photographers/videographers already lie in a Nikon Eco System with probably millions of dollars worth of photographic gear for Nikon, it makes since to use the highest end Nikon. Very simple choice I assume.

I bet they didn't analyze the matter as much as our dpreview astrophysicst commenters have.

It's just the highest end camera from Nikon for god's sake :D simple as that.

Not to mention the awesome camera being rugged as hell which is their first priority above all (if they had Canon gear partnership they'd use 1DxIIs) and the D5 does everything they want such as incredible easy automated time lapse and very high qualiy high ISO photographs in the dark and huge shutter mechanism wear out accuations. Lovely camera. Which I had one as I always wanted to try the S35/APS-C 4K video from a Nikon camera.

CaPi-no, Nikon does not pay to be on the station-they are buying the cameras.

Canon has tried at least 3 times to get on the ISS, but those gray lenses keep flunking the tests-no lie. The vibration and stress of launch are too much for them.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 22:36 UTC

The ISS moves at 17,150 mph, so things happen FAST, and the guy up there are scientists and engineers. So they want (need) one brand and one model of camera for simplicity.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2017 at 22:33 UTC as 19th comment

My reason for interest in the new PW units is simple: reliability. Scroll through the other radio trigger unit reviews at the major camera store websites, and you will find al kinds of complaints about poor reliability. All brands, even PW, have some complaints, but the PW brand has far, far fewer than most, even some of the expensive European systems.

I also like the combined transmitter and receiver functionality-three units provides Tx, Rx, and a backup, as opposed to buying two transmitters and two receivers. This is simpler and saves money.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2013 at 16:07 UTC as 14th comment

And Phottix has been sued by PW for patent infringement. Another Chinese company stealing intellectual property.


Please don't support thieves.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2013 at 15:58 UTC as 15th comment
In reply to:

Nikon007: Why does it have to be so big and ugly?

Easy to find AA batteries. Plus, antennas have to be a certain size to work properly-you just cannot say make it 1 inch long and expect good performance-it has to be calculated. If the size is off by as little as 5%, the range will be cut in half, or worse.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2013 at 15:57 UTC
In reply to:

shaocaholica: Can someone explain why when first party camera makers started making wireless flashes years ago they didn't just go straight to radio controlled? Was there some tech barrier?

RF spectrum is tightly controlled by the ITU, the worlds oldest international organization, and for good reasons. Radio spectrum is very limited, and everyone wants certain frequencies, because they are easy to deal with, have long range, reasonable antenna size, etc. Spectrum for new services (flash triggers) has to be applied for, justified, and allocated, and the organization only meets once every four years. In addition, making any radio requires independent testing to show no interference with other devices. Company I work for built an entire building-all wood-just for testing. The tests cost around $50,000. By comparison, an optical trigger is a simple device, with minimal testing required.

Link | Posted on Mar 27, 2013 at 15:54 UTC
Total: 10, showing: 1 – 10