Trackside with Erik and Mike Vol. 2 - February 16, 2004

[M636C]

As others have said, it's clear that photo 1 was taken by Mike, since Erik doesn't have the telephoto, and Erik's photo of Mike lined up for the shot shows the telephoto in place on the tripod. It is the more striking shot, but Erik's would be better for anyone wanting to know what the second unit was, or needing a detail shot of the leading unit.

What is Mike's lens? My Canon telephoto is a 75-300, and I didn't know they made a 100-300 also.

For those of us outside the USA, the camera is known as a Canon EOS 300D (this is a feature of cameras in the USA, and is used to differentiate between cameras purchased inside and outside the USA).

The EOS 300D wasn't available when I purchased my EOS 10D (Sorry, I don't know the USA name) but the 10D cost about $1500 without lens, and can't use the lens that comes with the 300D because the back element fouls part of the body (something to think about if you were trying to use it on another Canon camera). I just use a 28-80, and I miss the wide angle I used to get on the film cameras, but like the extra telephoto effect (80 x 1.6 = 128mm).

In general, I've never used a better camera than the EOS 10D, and it seems much better in most respects than the EOS 50e I used before.

What modes do you use for taking the photos? I have found "Sports" mode useful, because it allows multiple exposures in quick succession, and allows a higher ISO rating for the exposure, (useful for "last shots of the day") although the file size is a bit bigger. The appearance of the two shots would suggest that Mike was using a higher ISO rating than Erik.

Do you guys use "Large Fine JPEG" or "Raw" file storage for the example photos? I think "Large Fine" gives as much definition as the Canon lens allows in most conditions, and there aren't many compression artefacts visible on enlargement.

Peter

[Bergie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by pathfinder1946

Hey guys both were great shots. But to show the massiveness of a train u need to try a shot lying down showing the train coming at u at an angle where u can see what the locomotive is pulling! Or try a trestle shot where u could show the same thing!

Hi Pathfinder,

Thanks for the feedback. I'll let Mike try that laying on the ground stuff. It was under 30 degrees and very windy that day. The air was cold enough, let alone the snow-covered ground. [:)]

As for trestles, we're in southeastern Wisconsin... not too many of those around here (unfortunately).

Take care,
Erik

[mikeyuhas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by M636C

What is Mike's lens? My Canon telephoto is a 75-300, and I didn't know they made a 100-300 also.

[snip]

What modes do you use for taking the photos? I have found "Sports" mode useful, because it allows multiple exposures in quick succession, and allows a higher ISO rating for the exposure, (useful for "last shots of the day") although the file size is a bit bigger.

[more snippage]

Do you guys use "Large Fine JPEG" or "Raw" file storage for the example photos? I think "Large Fine" gives as much definition as the Canon lens allows in most conditions, and there aren't many compression artefacts visible on enlargement.

My lens is, indeed, a 100-300mm zoom, f4.5-5.6, at least a dozen years old. There's still one in Canon's catalog, though I'd buy the 75-300 if I had to do it today. (M636 is correct in stating the 18-55mm lens bundled with the Digital Rebel cannot be used on any other camera body.)

The Sports mode on the Digital Rebel limits you to ISO 400. That can be a drawback when shooting very early or very late; it's useful for fast-moving trains on sunny days. I tend to use manual exposure mode with longer focal lengths... otherwise, the train's headlight and ditch lights wreak havoc on the exposure.

While I've tinkered with the Canon raw format, I'm sticking with large and fine jpegs for now, primarily because the third-party utility I use to extract the exif data doesn't work with raw images.

[JoeUmp]

I must be the guy that this series is being done for. I can't tell you why, but I like number 1 better. It just appeals to me.[:D]

[rhettsease]

Both were good but I like #2 .

[Anonymous]

I noticed with interest how easy it is to change the ASA on the Rebel...not so with some earlier digital models that have the ASA set at 50. With a low setting getting a sharp picture like photo 2 is only possible under the best lighting conditions. My vote is photo 2, because the photographer obviously compensated for the speed of the train to get the the sharp photo . Photo 1 was simply being at the right place at the right time, and is a "point and shoot"

[Anonymous]

I voted for No. 1 because light or no light that shot of the train coming around the curve with a touch of snow on the ground and mostly because of the trees backgrounding the train. The train was set off very well by that.
I originally liked No. 2 because of the openess of the whole scene but the curving and the trees took the vote.
And, by the way, a point and shoot can take some great photos. In my not so humble opinion.

[Anonymous]

#1 got my vote for a variety of reasons.

1. Photo 1 is more inventive than the standard 3/4 wedgie in #2.
2. Photo 2 could use some Photoshop to rotate the image to level.
3. I love my tele lens and head-on-tele shots!

My thoughts about the RAW vs. JPEG question: I always shoot in RAW with my dRebel. RAW allows you to alter many factors such as exposure (+/- 2 stops), white balance, and other shot options after the fact. RAW files are not compressed like JPEG's are, so the uncompressed image stays until you convert it. I have saved many shots from disaster in low light and other extreme conditions. In addition, shooting in RAW allows you to get the most out of every shot. I use the bundled FileViewer software to process my RAW's and find it more than adequate.

[Anonymous]

I voted for number #2 as it shows more of the train. I am more interested in seeing what the train consists of than in composition. To me shot #2 was more interesting in that I saw more of the train.

[Bergie]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bnsfjth

#1 got my vote for a variety of reasons.

1. Photo 1 is more inventive than the standard 3/4 wedgie in #2.
2. Photo 2 could use some Photoshop to rotate the image to level.
3. I love my tele lens and head-on-tele shots!

[snip]

Just to clarify, we haven't been using Photoshop to clean up and of our shots (and the train is going down hill).

Erik

[Anonymous]

I like photo no. 1 because the angle of the shot,and it coming around the curve gives it that ,I am in charge affect,if you know what I mean.

[Anonymous]

I voted for photo #1 because this angle gives 'life' to the locomotive as it snakes toward the photographer. I can almost feel myself taking a step back to make sure I am railfanning at a safe distance.

[Anonymous]

I voted for #2, but they are both excellent photos.

[Anonymous]

Both shots are awesome photos, but #1 has more character, with the train bending around the corner, it looks like it is going uphill(?).

(¯`·._.·[†«ðrågøñslãµër»†]·._.·´¯)

[Anonymous]

Neither shot had great lighting-head on shots require better lighting but #2 had better contrast with the light that was available. I like the head on view of #1 but the low light just killed it.