Yeah

Comment on Apollo Moon Landing Hoax – More Photographic Proof by mitaka.

Yes, you’re right. You cannot compare capturing the moon and stars. The conditions are even worse – you have the sun in the sky, it’s reflection from the moon’s surface (imagine sunny day in snowy mountain (may be I over exaggerated with the snow)) and as you said lack of the atmosphere (which means more sunlight on the surface). So even with the widest dynamic range camera (digital CSMOS/CCD sensors or films they had back then) you’ll not be able to capture the stars (may be Venus???) at this low exposure value (what ever combination between exposure time(shutter speed), ISO and aperture). If on the other hand you or you wife knows how to do it – I’ll talk to my boss to invite you for an interview for a nice job position in our company cause after over than 10 years with digital photography the wide dynamic range is still one of the biggest issues we have (just to mention that the conventional film has a lot wider dynamic range but still not enough for what we’re talking about). On the other issues you were talking about is the temperature – you’re again right – no way the camera film to survive at the heat, BUT – the temperature of the surface cannot be transferred into the camera cause there is no atmosphere – nothing to conduct the heat – actually the COLD here will be the problem if the camera is well covered from the sun so we should ask the guys how their cameras were able to work at such low temperatures…. And if everyone doubts – please read around the net to see how much is the difference into the temperatures between the sun illuminated surfaces and the ones in shadow(consider it this as a homework) in vacuum. And just to inform you – I use to doubt about all moon landing stuff but after I’ve read and watched all of the conspiracy theories – I’m telling you – I cannot be more sure that the guys HAVE LANDED on the moon – just there is no way to simulate the reality as we know it so well in studio – there should’ve been at least a single mistake (for example at least one object with two or more shadows as if there were more than one light source over there as our not very well educated (or if there are please give your diploma back the the university and ask them to give you money back) conspiracy theorist friends insist). And finally how come we’ve got this nice reflector on the moon surface people use every they since then? May be our guys got in orbit of the moon, drop the reflector and it lent nice but our guys couldn’t that’s why they come back (or before that) into a special studio to make all of this fake? Guys just get over it. All of this made possible because of the work of 1000 extraordinary people (not like me and you (obviously)). So if for a some reason the man walking on the moon doesn’t seem to you as possible especially for 1969 cause your brain doesn’t get it well think of heart transplant operations – can you do it? Do you know what it takes? Have any idea about what 25nm smei conductor technology is? I guess no. But is in you packet. Or under the keyboard (or around it) which you’re now thinking to use to argue with me?… Have a good day everyone. I like you all. Without your arguments I would still think the lending of the moon was fake :)