Hacker News Reader

Comment by peeters | Hacker News Reader

I mean I don't know if I'm more impressed by their level of detail from a $10 billion telescope or your level of detail from a consumer-grade telescope!

View on HN

The James Webb image shows a level of detail we have never seen before. Hundreds of galaxies in the background that are invisible on the consumer grade telescope.

Here's the full resolution image:

https://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/im...

I'm quietly chomping at the bit for a Webb full deepfield survey rather than the hint of it we saw in 2022...

If this post is to be believed, a full deepfield survey would take four thousand to fourty thousand years. https://www.reddit.com/r/jameswebb/comments/wrwsfc/how_long_...

Oh, don't get me wrong, I am absolutely astounded by the JWST's level of detail and am in awe of the pictures it takes. And they are obviously far more detailed than the OP's. I also think it was a worthy expense. I was just noting that my awe of both is comparable when you normalize for cost!

Thanks, but it if you look closely you'll see that the Webb image has almost an image worth of detail within each pixel of my image.

Once in a while, I have the impulse to buy the equipment to make these kinds of photos, then I check the price (at least 4k USD), realize I am not from US and cool down tell next time.

It's consumer level, but not cheap at all.

Its all relative, right? The cost is about a millionth of the JWST image. A millionth!

At that price difference it's silly to not buy the gear! Right? Right?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com