Himawari satellite - earth and moon image.

[Redcrown]

A friend posted this amazing earth image on Facebook. I commented wondering what kind of lens gave that perspective. He sent links with enough data and specs on that satellite to choke a horse. But I could not find anything about the lenses, if it even has traditional lenses. Anybody know how this was done?

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=1555387225051115&set=gm.433440236414053&idorvanity=367552686336142

[Frans Waterlander]

To me it looks like a regular shot from a satelite or spacestation, nothing more, nothing less.

[Adam Schallau]

It's a composite. The moon isn't that close to Earth.

[Redcrown]

Everything the web has about the Himawari satellite covers the megapixels, the scan rates, the transmission speeds, etc., but nothing about the lenses and focal length. Sure, there are a lot of fake composite moon images. But here is a verified real shot, taken at 555mm.

https://blog.sigmaphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/mike-carroll-3.jpg

[Frans Waterlander]

"To me it looks like a regular shot from a satelite or spacestation, nothing more, nothing less."

[Peano]

The moon isn't that close to Earth.

Wouldn't you need to know the focal length before drawing that conclusion?

[Peano]

This appears to be approximately a three-quarter moon. The white circle circumscribes the disk of the moon. Question: How could stars be visible in the area indicated? Wouldn't the moon (in shadow) block visibility of the stars beyond?

Possible answers: 1) The moon was added (composited) in post, or 2) the stars were added in post.

 

[mcbroomf]

Well spotted!

Option 3) these are lights from cities on the Dark Side Of The Moon ... 

[Redcrown]

Thanks, Peano. I think you are on to something. I found it hard to believe that a satellite would have a 400mm to 600mm lens.

Also, the Facebook account of the original poster looks fake too.

[degrub]

then there is Hubble
and the NSA versions pointed the other direction