[GingisK]

I didn't say the Apollo cameras were in underwater housings. The housings were obviously made for the lunar environment. It was an easy matter for NASA engineers to make housings akin to underwater housings. Details are available on the Internet if you would just do a search. The Hasselblad film cameras were not off-the-shelf either. They were hardened for the lunar application.

Vacuum is must easier to make a seal for than underwater devices since vacuum is only 15psi less than what we normally experience rather than hundreds or thousands of PSI at water depth. If we can seal underwater devices, we can seal for space. Lunar temperatures are hot, but not like an iron foundry.

Environmental conditions for the cameras was the same as for the space suits. The space suits had to made to dump extra heat because the astronauts' bodies generated more than was absorbed from the environment. Cameras had reflective bodies and internal insulation, especially around the film magazines.

If you consult the online documentation, you would find that there were film safes for unexposed and exposed film storage and requirements for the amount of time that film could remain in the cameras. Remember that surface time was only a few hours. The rest of the time the film was in the command module.

[Talisker]

What you’re saying has either been already covered on this thread, or is so illogical I’m not wasting my time answering it. “Hardened” cameras? Why “hard”? “Iron foundry”? 230 degrees is plenty hot for plastic film thanks. “Space suits made to dump heat”? Yeah, with steam jets - see any of those on the photos? “Cameras with internal insulation”? Vacuum IS insulation - physical connection of “insulation” would just increase the conduction of heat.

You just make things up. Go away.