Bob Michaels
nobody special
You can listen to the interview with astronaut John Grunsfeld about the 1929 Zeiss Ikon he is carrying on board the shuttle (scheduled launch 11-May-09) to photograph the Hubble telescope while they are servicing it. It is the camera used by a rather famous explorer back when it was new.
NPR story at http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=103749295&m=103749275
NPR story at http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=103749295&m=103749275
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
What a fantastic thing to do .... John Grunsfield is amazing and I was intrigued by his comment that he feels truly at home when he is in space and would actually like to live there in the future!
I'd love to be there when that film comes out of the developing tank!
I'd love to be there when that film comes out of the developing tank!
Pablito
coco frío
If you took it from the inside of the shuttle into space, the vacuum of space would cause the bellows to blow up like a balloon and burst because of the air inside the camera. Unless you equalized the pressure
W
Way
Guest
I have one of these! I would love to try it out but have no clue on how to get film for it.
raid
Dad Photographer
This is really a cool report. An antique Zeiss Ikon camera to used inside the space shuttle! Long live film photography.
Eric T
Well-known
This is a cool story but it costs $10,000 per pound to launch anything into orbit. I am not sure this is the best use of our taxes when there are lighter and more functional cameras available today compared to 80 years ago.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Wow. By that math we shouldn't take any camera up. Once they get there, they're all weightless though.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Wow. By that math we shouldn't take any camera up. Once they get there, they're all weightless though.
Trust a bean counter to spoil our fun Earl ...
See, sometimes logic and common sense are just wrong!
Frank Petronio
Well-known
We should only launch border-line anorexic midgets based on that theory.
Of course, a true cost-benefit analysis would lead to 10x more remotely piloted spacecraft and the only human space travel would be those private vanity trips that Billionaires arrange.
Of course, a true cost-benefit analysis would lead to 10x more remotely piloted spacecraft and the only human space travel would be those private vanity trips that Billionaires arrange.
lorriman
Established
Relative to the total cost it's nothing.
Considering that such missions are conducted by humans and not robots then the human angle is very important not only for the sake of the equilibrium of the humans but also in humanising the mission itself for the sake of the tax-payer. Henry Ford may have convinced many of us to accept the 'life' of a pseudo robot but anyone with any sense will resist such moves except in the case of starvation.
Let him take his camera.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Pressure won't build up in those cameras or lenses. They're far from airtight! They'll quickly equalize themselves.
There are plenty of anorexic 4 ft. 8 inch chicks weighing under 80 pounds that could become astronauts. The space suits would be smaller and cheaper, they'd require less food and water for the voyages, etc. If all this was of such major concern why did they choose Hasselblads instead of Olympus Pen's for the first moon landing?
There are plenty of anorexic 4 ft. 8 inch chicks weighing under 80 pounds that could become astronauts. The space suits would be smaller and cheaper, they'd require less food and water for the voyages, etc. If all this was of such major concern why did they choose Hasselblads instead of Olympus Pen's for the first moon landing?
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Keith: I have always been an unabashed space and astronaut fan, always living very close to Kennedy Space Flight Center. I was there when Gus Grissom became the 2nd man in space in summer 1961. Those guys were old school test pilots, real hot dogs. Back then every astronaut got a new Corvette when they arrived at Cape Canaveral and they made good use of them.
Long ago, a daughter, then a student at Gemini Elementary school said to me "Dad, that astronaut John Young who always comes to school and tells us to study hard......Dad, I just figured out he is famous!"
Funny, yesterday I was photographing and interviewing one of the last local orange grove owners around. He told me that he had been in the citrus business for over 35 years, ever since he got laid off at Kennedy Space Center when the Apollo Lunar Landing program ended.
ChrisN
Striving
Gus Grissom? Wasn't it Alan Shepherd in '61 (sub-orbital) and John Glenn in '62 (orbital)?
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Couldn't you just keep it under your jacket until you're ready to shoot? :angel:
Jarle Aasland
Nikon SP/S2, Fuji X100
Here they are:
1. Alan Shepard - 5 May 1961 - first manned US spaceflight (suborbital)
2 . Gus Grissom - 21 July 1961 - second flight (suborbital)
3. John Glenn - 20 February 1962 - first US astronaut in orbit
Then there were two more Mercury flights in 1962, and a final one in May 1963.
Jarle
W
Way
Guest
I think John Grunsfeld said that he would be taking pictures from inside the shuttle.
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Eventually the race was won by the USSR:
Yuri Alekseyevich Gagarin, on 12 April 1961, he became the first human in outer space and the first to orbit the earth. Don't know if he used a Zorki or Kiev or even a FED for making photos.
There is an official memorial presented by USA astronauts:
Last edited:
ZeissFan
Veteran
W
Way
Guest
I don't want to hijack this thread but thanks for the link. Looks like the only 9x12 film they have is:
Fotokemika Efke PL 100 M iso 100
9x12 cm/50 sheets ($30)
The camera came with one single sheet holder and one pack sheet holder, which I assume is now useless? There is still some exposed film in the pack holder. Probably gone bad but I should try to get it developed. That's another thing - I don't have any way of developing these sheets.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
I think the bellows might de-hydrate pretty quickly in a vacuum. And even though the camera isn't made to be air tight, there could be trouble with how the air inside the camera gets out; again, I'd think the bellows might tear as the result.
And, I'm not sure the gloves the astronauts wear would let them use the camera rather than just hold on to it.
Rob
And, I'm not sure the gloves the astronauts wear would let them use the camera rather than just hold on to it.
Rob