objects look bigger the closer you hold them to your eye

I’m trying to understand the view of the ‘splat’ theorists so please help me out here. We all know the jellyfish UAP looks alot like a poop. Uncannily so. Yet to just dismiss it as a visual artifact of avian feces or the corpse of an insect makes no sense to me. In this worldview: 1. these surveillance systems are completely useless when there is even a little bit of moisture because condensation would create water droplets, leaving massive visual artifacts in the field of view. 2. assuming the outside glass casing is only a few inches away from the camera, the smudge would have to be small. Really reall small because even at 1000x zoom (if I am reading the screen correctly) the object takes up a tiny area of the screen. Someone here could probably calculate an estimated size of the smudge with a few assumptions. As an experiment you can perform at home if you hold your finger up to your eye a few inches away it looks really big. Now imagine you could magnify your vision by 10x, 100x, 1000x, and think about how small your finger would have to be to take up the same percentage of the field of view the UAP does in the video. 3. The flir cameras have basically an infinite depth of view? Because to capture both a smudge a few inches away and objects hundreds of meters away in the same frame with 3000x zoom with visual clarity would be quite impressive.

I’m no expert on these surveillance platforms but what I do know is that when I smudge my glasses I can see the smudges on the lens when I take them off and inspect but when I put my glasses back on they disappear and I can see through the lens just fine.