>>Quick question: What's the best film speed/shutter speed/and f-stop >>combination to take pictures of satellites? It should be noted that I'm >>currently using a 35mm, with 1000 speed film, and a shutter speed of >>20 seconds. I use a 58mm lens, at an f-stop of 1.2. > > >Other question: Are you using slides or negatives ? I think you are using slides. If you are using slides, a moderate film of ISO 400 is sufficient to photograph satellites upto magnitude 4, depending of which equipment you use or the angular motion of the satellite. Generaly speeking, a 58mm lens with f1.2 is good. If you are trying to photograph short flashing satellites, a 135mm f2.8 is better. >> >>Unfortunately, I live in an area that can only be described as >>"light-polluted", > >That's why it is better to use a less sensitive film of about ISO400. >I live also in a light polluted area and my methode of photographing satellites is as follows: > >I almost never use slides. Instead I use a Tmax 400 black and white film which I puch to ISO1600. Now you say that's making this film very sensitive ? Well, it's not. With pushing it to ISO1600 you get a much higher contrast and with this film it gives very good results. It certainly gives much better results than Tmax 3200 which gives much grain and less contrast. >Maybe that film would be good when you are living in an area with no light pollution. > >> >>Should I use slower film? (How about black and white, for that matter?) >>Close the aperature a little? Any advice would be welcome. > >You can close the aperature a little when you decide to keep on using the ISO1000 film. Your pictures should be a little sharper also. > >>(I did get a nice shot of Mir the other night, the second time around. The >>first pass, at about 9:00, was washed out -- It looked like it was taken >>in the middle of the _day_!) > >I have the same picture greg ! > >Greetings, > >Tristan Cools >