From yesterday, gray and dismal as it was, I am encouraged a bit that there seems to be more rail traffic. Hopefully signs that the economy is doing a bit better.

Here, a northbound empty coal train waits as a southbound general freight comes by, basically a 'documentary' shot ....
Nikon D2x, 50mm f/1.8


From this morning, the clearing clouds and morning light was too much to resist as this southbound coal train comes by....
Nikon D2x, 50mm f/1.8

The first one doesn't do anything for me but I like the second one much more

Have you thought about cropping the bottom of shot #2? Basically crop up until the foreground hill (on the left) is gone, giving the illusion that the train is up higher than it really is...perhaps makes a more dramatic photo. I tried this crop just now and it turned out pretty neat, just something to think about

I need to go out and get some trains, lots where I live and I only have 1 good shot!

I really like the second one. I guess it doesn't matter which lens you use, you just get the shot!

Second one is nice. I just got the 50mm F1.8 and I am enjoying it too.

cputeq wrote:
The first one doesn't do anything for me but I like the second one much more


That's kind of why I said 'documentary'


Have you thought about cropping the bottom of shot #2? Basically crop up until the foreground hill (on the left) is gone, giving the illusion that the train is up higher than it really is...perhaps makes a more dramatic photo. I tried this crop just now and it turned out pretty neat, just something to think about

I need to go out and get some trains, lots where I live and I only have 1 good shot!


Not really. I purposely composed the shot so the train would run from the bottom left third to the top right third. Appreciate your thoughts!

Wow JackO that second shot is excellent... love the composition. That 50/f1.8 has gotta be the most unbeatable "bargain" in the Nikkor lineup.

Avi B wrote:
I really like the second one. I guess it doesn't matter which lens you use, you just get the shot!


Thank you Avi. I've been going out with just one lens, I try to use a different one every few days. Kind of a discipline thing I suppose

dj dunzie wrote:
Wow JackO that second shot is excellent... love the composition. That 50/f1.8 has gotta be the most unbeatable "bargain" in the Nikkor lineup.

To be so incredibly **cheap**, it is an amazingly sharp little lens. Thank you dj!

williamkazak wrote:
Second one is nice. I just got the 50mm F1.8 and I am enjoying it too.

Thank you William. I would have thought you'd have the 50mm from way back....

Nicely done Jack, both of 'em are clean and crisp. I can imagine how much rumble you had on the first shot though.

Agee the 2nd shot is awesome

oh yeah Jack, the better light always makes the best picture I am really diggin the 2nd one man


J

One thing that always bugs me about foamer photos is the tendency to put the engine at the very edge of the frame, about to exit. That just looks wrong to me. Wildlife photographers don't do this, sports photographers don't, and neither do wedding photographers. Composition just seems more balanced when there's some room left for the engine to "run", I think. I think the second shot would also have greatly benefitted from using a polarizer. I've learned to only use MC polarizers for photo'ing trains because of issues with ghosting.

As for the Nikon 50mm f1.8, I'm luke warm. I mostly shoot trains at night, so low light performance is important to me. I tried lenses 20mm f2.8 AFD, 28mm f1.8 (sigma), 50mm fl.8, and 85mm f1.8, all on D80 and D300. Big let down, at least for me. I replaced with Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 and Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR. I got less ghosting and CA. Sometimes I need a lens faster than f2.8, and for that I now turn to the Sigma 30mm f1.4. If/when I eventually buy a D700 I will replace the 30mm and buy a Sigma 50mm f1.4. I'll agree that the Nikon 50mm f1.8 is certainly decent considering what it cost on eBay. On a DX camera I've found the Sigma 30mm f1.4 a bit more useful, but then I tend to shoot wide. The new Sigmas are superb, BTW.

Kent in SD,
The Noct Foamer

Two23 wrote:
One thing that always bugs me about foamer photos is the tendency to put the engine at the very edge of the frame, about to exit. That just looks wrong to me. Wildlife photographers don't do this, sports photographers don't, and neither do wedding photographers. Composition just seems more balanced when there's some room left for the engine to "run", I think. I think the second shot would also have greatly benefitted from using a polarizer. I've learned to only use MC polarizers for photo'ing trains because of issues with ghosting.

As for the Nikon 50mm f1.8, I'm luke warm. I mostly shoot trains at night, so low light performance is important to me. I tried lenses 20mm f2.8 AFD, 28mm f1.8 (sigma), 50mm fl.8, and 85mm f1.8, all on D80 and D300. Big let down, at least for me. I replaced with Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 and Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR. I got less ghosting and CA. Sometimes I need a lens faster than f2.8, and for that I now turn to the Sigma 30mm f1.4. If/when I eventually buy a D700 I will replace the 30mm and buy a Sigma 50mm f1.4. I'll agree that the Nikon 50mm f1.8 is certainly decent considering what it cost on eBay. On a DX camera I've found the Sigma 30mm f1.4 a bit more useful, but then I tend to shoot wide. The new Sigmas are superb, BTW.

Kent in SD,
The Noct Foamer

I think shooting trains has as many opinions as shooters

what the heck is a "foamer"

J

All photography has lots of different approaches. That's one thing I like about forums--I can see & discuss different kinds. I started photography as a landscape photographer, then gravitated towards Fine Art. My railfan shots tend to be radically different from those who started out as railfans because of different photo backgrounds.

In England, people who are really into trains are called "trainspotters." In America they are generally called "railfans." The train crews call the more rabid railfans "foamers," supposedly because they foam at the mouth when they hear a train coming. It wasn't meant to be a complimentary term, but most of us really hard core railfans think it's funny and often refer to ourselves as "foamers." BNSF crews refer to me as the "Night Foamer" on their radios. A high percentage of my shots are taken during the night, generally with an extensive portable high powered lighting system.


Kent in SD

Two23 wrote:
One thing that always bugs me about foamer photos is the tendency to put the engine at the very edge of the frame, about to exit. That just looks wrong to me. Wildlife photographers don't do this, sports photographers don't, and neither do wedding photographers. Composition just seems more balanced when there's some room left for the engine to "run", I think. I think the second shot would also have greatly benefitted from using a polarizer. I've learned to only use MC polarizers for photo'ing trains because of issues with ghosting.

As for the Nikon 50mm f1.8, I'm luke warm. I mostly shoot trains at night, so low light performance is important to me. I tried lenses 20mm f2.8 AFD, 28mm f1.8 (sigma), 50mm fl.8, and 85mm f1.8, all on D80 and D300. Big let down, at least for me. I replaced with Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 and Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR. I got less ghosting and CA. Sometimes I need a lens faster than f2.8, and for that I now turn to the Sigma 30mm f1.4. If/when I eventually buy a D700 I will replace the 30mm and buy a Sigma 50mm f1.4. I'll agree that the Nikon 50mm f1.8 is certainly decent considering what it cost on eBay. On a DX camera I've found the Sigma 30mm f1.4 a bit more useful, but then I tend to shoot wide. The new Sigmas are superb, BTW.

Kent in SD,
The Noct Foamer

Hmm, I'm wondering if you're wrapped a bit tight....

The reason wedding, sports, and wildlife photographers don't put trains on the edge of a frame is because they don't shoot trains....... Sorry, I just can't help it.....

The point of the 50mm f/1.8 observation is this..... at about 1/10th the price of the 17-55mm, it is an incredible lens. It's funny that your would "replace" a 50mm f/1.8 with a 17-55 when they are two entirely different lenses, in all respects.

BTW, I also shoot with the 17-55mm, and it flares like a biach when locomotive headlights are shining into it. I haven't found the 50mm f/1.8 to be any worse in this respect.

When I shoot wide, I use a WA, in my case, my 12-24mm Nikkor.

I hate polarizers.

jmcfadden wrote:
oh yeah Jack, the better light always makes the best picture I am really diggin the 2nd one man


J

Thanks John

NightOwl Cat wrote:
Nicely done Jack, both of 'em are clean and crisp. I can imagine how much rumble you had on the first shot though.

I live for the rumble Thanks man!

Sambru wrote:
Agee the 2nd shot is awesome

Glad you liked it, thanks!

Two23 wrote:
All photography has lots of different approaches. That's one thing I like about forums--I can see & discuss different kinds. I started photography as a landscape photographer, then gravitated towards Fine Art. My railfan shots tend to be radically different from those who started out as railfans because of different photo backgrounds.

In England, people who are really into trains are called "trainspotters." In America they are generally called "railfans." The train crews call the more rabid railfans "foamers," supposedly because they foam at the mouth when they hear a train coming. It wasn't meant to be a complimentary term, but most of us really hard core railfans think it's funny and often refer to ourselves as "foamers." BNSF crews refer to me as the "Night Foamer" on their radios. A high percentage of my shots are taken during the night, generally with an extensive portable high powered lighting system.


Kent in SD

thanks for the clarification and in general i loathe the typical train images that are out there on the railfan sites. I do not hate the folk that shoot them as i have met many and the term "foamer" seems a bit harsh but perhaps accurate . The typical shots tho have sure made me a whole pile of money since my work looks nothing at all like it


J

Hey Jack,

HMMM I like that 2nd shot, but it seems yoy've heard that already. The 50 f/1.8 is one of my favorites. A highly under-appreciated lens.

Cheers,
Andre

Jack OBrien wrote:

The reason wedding, sports, and wildlife photographers don't put trains on the edge of a frame is because they don't shoot trains....... Sorry, I just can't help it.....

The point of the 50mm f/1.8 observation is this..... at about 1/10th the price of the 17-55mm, it is an incredible lens. It's funny that your would "replace" a 50mm f/1.8 with a 17-55 when they are two entirely different lenses, in all respects.

BTW, I also shoot with the 17-55mm, and it flares like a biach when locomotive headlights are shining into it. I haven't found the 50mm f/1.8 to be any worse in this respect.

When I shoot wide, I use a WA, in my case, my 12-24mm Nikkor.

I hate polarizers.


Trains about to run off the edge are one of my pet peeves. Take a look at shots done by O.W. Link, Howard Ande, Steve Crise, Scott Lothes, etc. to get an idea of how my own preference came to be. Most issues of Trains Magazine or Railroad & Railfan magazine have at least a few of their shots, or you can google them.

I've come to think that the lens is the single most critical piece of gear, and I don't use cost as a criteria. My choice was to have fewer lenses, but have each one be the very best available. I keep good lenses a lot longer than I keep cameras, . I've not had trouble with flare/ghosting with my Nikon 17-55mm f2.8. I do use lens hoods with every lens every time though. The very worst lens I ever owned for that was the 85mm f1.8. For me, it was unusuable. The 50mm f1.8 isn't anywhere near as bad, but I think the 17-55mm is a tad sharper with better color. (Newer coatings?) I also shoot some 4x5 and see DSLR as my "fast" system. I love the speed of using a zoom. I used to own the Nikon 12-24mm f4, but needed something faster for my night shots. I went with the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8, which is excellent. Sold the Nikon. As a bonus, the Tokina has less distortion. Not everybody needs f2.8, but if you do there is no substitute.

Since I have a landscape photography background, I see a polarizer as absolutely indispensable. On your second shot I think it would have removed the glare from the windows so you could see the crew, as well as put better color in the sky. I generally never use filters, but a polarizer and ND grads are the exceptions. Most of my train shots are done at night now, and obviously I don't use polarizers for those.


Kent in SD,
Noct Foamer

how could I miss this one ? the second one would be a nice poster !

Guy

Thanks Jack

..always great pleasure to watch your trains

... and this second one

I like two a bit more.
Looks like you have mastered the D2x also, I would have blown the highlights with mine for sure.
Thanks for all your train shoots, Jack