As I’m writing this, Orion is a few hours from splashdown off the coast of San Diego — the end of Artemis II’s ten-day journey around the Moon and back. Pilot Victor Glover, preparing for re-entry, told reporters there are still more images to come: “All the good stuff is coming back with us. There are so many more pictures, so many more stories.”
Most of those pictures were shot on a Nikon D5. A camera that came out in 2016. You can buy one used right now for around a thousand dollars.
I still own a D5 with a bunch of Nikon F mount lenses. In fact a few months ago as part of a mid-winter purge of my camera cabinet, I sold my Nikon D850 while deciding to keep the D5. So when NASA reached the same conclusion for Artemis II, I felt a particular kind of satisfaction. (The vindicated-by-space-agency feeling is, I’ll admit, new for me.)
Why the D5 beats the newer stuff in space
The D5 has a 20.8 megapixel full-frame sensor and an ISO ceiling that reaches into science fiction territory — 3,280,000, if you want the actual number. The Nikon Z9, by comparison, tops out at 102,400. And even when you downsize Z9 files to match the D5’s resolution, Nikon’s old DSLR still delivers cleaner images at high ISO values. Nikon prioritized low-noise performance on the D5 in a way it hasn’t since, because higher megapixel counts require smaller individual pixels — and smaller pixels mean less light gathered, which means more noise. More resolution turned out to be the wrong trade for this job.
Space is almost entirely dark, punctuated by blinding light. The far side of the Moon during Artemis II’s transit? No ambient light at all. Earth through Orion’s windows? Extreme dynamic range. The D5 handles this with a capability that newer, higher-resolution bodies simply can’t match.
The crew actually pushed to get a Nikon Z9 aboard at the last minute (and succeeded — it made the mission for testing purposes), but the rigorously tested D5 was always the primary camera. The Z9 has been in regular use on the ISS since 2022, but space qualification for crewed missions beyond low Earth orbit takes years. The D5 is a known quantity — tested in radiation, zero gravity, extreme temperature swings. The newer camera hasn’t earned that yet.
In total, Orion carried 32 cameras — 17 of them handheld — including GoPros, smartphones, and an 80–400mm zoom for surface detail through the windows. But the images already being called generational, including the Earthset photo of our planet rising over the lunar limb, were shot on the decade-old DSLR.
The D850 was the “better” camera on paper
I bought my D850 thinking I was upgrading. By most conventional measures I was — 45 megapixels versus the D5’s 20.8, excellent dynamic range in its own right, a more modern autofocus system. A genuinely fantastic camera which I took on a trip to Iceland in 2023. I sold it in 2026 anyway.
The reason was essentially the same one NASA’s engineers landed on: the D5 is better at the thing I actually want to do. I shoot in low light situations like sunsets or dusk on the street. I don’t do video. High resolution is useful when you need to crop aggressively or make large prints. I just don’t print that large right now. The D5 is heavy, but feels right with the “fixed” vertical grip just like my F6 35mm film SLR. It was the “better” camera in my hands regardless of what was on paper.
When the upgrade is worth it
I want to be careful not to make this a blanket argument for never upgrading. It isn’t. I’m typing this on a new laptop that replaced a 2019 model I’d held onto stubbornly for years. That upgrade has genuinely been worth it — the difference in processing speed and battery life is real and daily, and I felt it immediately. The new machine is meaningfully better at the thing I actually use it for.
The difference between the laptop and the camera is the nature of the job. For the laptop, newer architecture solved a real limitation in my workflow. For the camera, the “upgrade” would have fixed a problem I don’t have while making worse the one I do. It’s why I can still create beautiful images with both digital and film cameras that are 10, 20, and even 30 years old.
“Is this newer thing better?” is often the wrong question. “Better at what, specifically?” is the right one.
The D5 is a decade old. It’s heavy, discontinued, and awesome. And as of today, it’s splashing down off San Diego — with memory cards of images still waiting to amaze us.
Sometimes the old workhorse wins.
