Skip to main content
Astronomy

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Why don't you take a photo of the Moon using a 24mm lens? $\endgroup$
    – Mick
    Commented Dec 29, 2017 at 15:08
  • $\begingroup$ I assume you mean as a reference? I plan to if I can tonight! Unfortunately, it's very cloudy here at the moment. But I feel like I must be doing something wrong here... $\endgroup$
    – kinkersnick
    Commented Dec 29, 2017 at 15:10
  • $\begingroup$ Maybe receptor needs to be 1000 times smaller too? $\endgroup$
    – J. Chomel
    Commented Dec 29, 2017 at 15:27
  • $\begingroup$ I just tried changing the dimensions to the actual 1:1 dimensions of the Earth and Moon, and it looks exactly the same, so I don't think it's anything to do with the receptor of the virtual camera. $\endgroup$
    – kinkersnick
    Commented Dec 29, 2017 at 16:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The moon (and the similarly sized sun) really are surprisingly tiny-- you can cover it with a dime held at arm's length. They both have a diameter of about 0.5 degrees, and the human field of vision is roughly 72 degrees (source: Commodore Sky Travel), so expect the moon to cover about 1/144th the width of the image or about 5-6 pixels for a pixel width of 800. mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/153600/… is vaguely related. nikonians.org/reviews/fov-tables also suggests 24mm has a largeish field of view. $\endgroup$
    – user21
    Commented Dec 29, 2017 at 16:19