Shooting a Moving train in Low Light Conditions

[gmat]

I'm saving up to get a better camera to replace my Samsung digital. I'm not satisfied with the clarity of my shots when shooting a rapidly moving train, especially when it's very cloudy or late in the afternoon. I'm looking for a camera that will; a, have a pretty rapid rate; b, auto focus quickly enough, in low light conditions. If anyone has experience with the Nikon D90 versus D5000, does the former fulfill the above requirements enough to justify the cost or am I looking for the impossible?

 

I used to shoot aircraft with a Nikon F2 and F3, so I have some experience, but can no longer use them.

 

Any advice or suggestions would be welcome.

 

Best wishes,

Grant

[KenS]

My train photographing was done in the days of film, with slower trains, and usually from a greater distance.  Even then, I needed to get a shutter speed of 1/250th of a second to freeze the train, which was hard to do with ASA 64 slide film! And I usually had to give up on any depth of field (i.e. use the lowest f-stop).

 

These days with settable "ASA", I expect you could get 1/500th with reasonable lighting, but you'll get more grain (technically I guess it's "noise", but it looks like film grain) as you boost the ASA, so there's going to be a tradeoff of grain versus blur versus f-stop with fast-moving trains and low light (assuming you have a camera that lets you set them manually; if all it has are pre-sets, you'll be stuck with whatever their "sports" setting does). A better camera probably has a better CCD, which means better low-light performance.

 

These days I use a Canon EOS 40, which does let me set all the necessary stuff manually (or not), and works well even at ASA 800; but unfortunately all I photograph are model trains, so I don't have any useful experience with photographing fast-moving trains in low light digitally. And I don't know anything about Nikon's product line.

 

I will say that switching from a good digital point-and-shoot to the Canon was worth the cost.  It has a better lens, works better in low light, and gives me more control over the photo (as well as the usual SLR benefit of changeable lenses, although I don't actually use more than the zoom that it came with).

[serenityFan]

I use the D90 and it is indeed quite usable at 800 ISO;

however if you are looking at low light photography you may want to budget for more than just the kit lens.

nikon has a range of "fast" prime lenses (with wide max aperture) for example:

nikon 35mm 1.8: http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_35_1p8g_n15/

nikon 50 mm 1.4: http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_50_1p4g_n15/

 

both of these lenses will work also with the D5000.

[Guest ___]

At the moment, my line up consist of a D1i (infrared converted from my old D1), a Nikon D1L (D1h converted to Lomography via Dianna F+) Fuji S2 pro, which I use for studio work, and a Nikon D2Hs which I use for trains. I was going for a D3 this year, but again decided to go back to Japan. In fact everytime I plan to upgrade, I go to Japan.

 

For when I go to Japan, I carry mounted to the D2Hs, an 18-200 and an 12-24 lens to save on weight. for train shooting at home, I have a 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, and a 12-24 f/4 until I go to FX format and buy the new ultra-wide. Maybe in the spring, I'll upgrade to a D3s or D700s (if it isn't pushed back again!)

 

I use to shoot with a Nikon F4s and F5 back in the film days, and I will slightly disagree with with buying a 50 f/1.4 for trains. Great specialty use lens, good for people, and sports, but not for trains, if you have to shoot at f/1.4, forget about having a sharp image of a train, you might get a destination board or headlight. I gave up on that real quick with mine. There is no DoF with a f/1.4, and if it is bright outside, your max aperture, is f/16 so you'll be use ND filters a lot on sunny days at ISO200. You're better off for the f/1.8 version for trains.

 

Personally, my advice is if money is not an issue for you, go with a D300 or D300s, if you want to stay a bit on the cheaper side, go with a used D200 or possibly a new D9000 (due out shortly) If you want the best pictures, don't invest in the camera body, but rather the best lens you can buy. Camera bodies are like PC's and are cycled out every 18 months now by Nikon for the most part.

 

For zooms, if you want to stay cheap, the 70-300 AF-S VRII lens is almost every bit as good as the f/2.8 I have now. I love my 70-300 at times over the 70-200 becasue at 300mm on the DX format, I have 450mm of reach. For mid-range, avoid the 18-55 VRI or VRII, they're junk kit lens. The 18-70 which does not have VR is optically a much better lens. Some people swear by the 24-120, mine was junk, becasue of a back focus issue that I was never able to get calibrated to any of my cameras, but the focal range is pretty decent for trains.

 

Hope this helps, sorry for the wordiness, this is what my college degree was in and what I do for a living, or was just until the economy crapped out, and the papers started giving point and shoots to the reporters to save in labor costs.

[gmat]

Thank you everyone for your comments and suggestions. I don't think that I can swing a D300 plus the 18-200 zoom package right now. I can get the D5000 with the two lens set, but with sacrifice and some help, I think that I can get the D90 plus 18-200 zoom. I'm hoping to get it before the middle of August, to take advantage of the summer sales and the Yokota Friendship Day, hopefully around Aug 21-22. (My first love, aircraft. Sorry.)

There isn't any package deal for body and 70-300 lens that I'm aware of right now.

 

I notice that the electronic station destination on the front of the trains becomes fragmented when I shoot. (at higher shutter speeds, I guess) Is there any way to avoid this? I was hoping that at faster shutter speeds would eliminate shake and blur on my shots.

 

Thank you and thank you for any further help.

Best wishes,

Grant

[CaptOblivious]

I notice that the electronic station destination on the front of the trains becomes fragmented when I shoot. (at higher shutter speeds, I guess) Is there any way to avoid this? I was hoping that at faster shutter speeds would eliminate shake and blur on my shots.

 

No way to avoid this. LED signs like used on trains never have all the lights on at once, for many reasons (power drain, even with LEDs, can be quite high; requires more circuitry to control). Instead, only bits of the sign—say, one horizontal row of LEDs—are turned on at any given moment. Kind of like how vacuum-tube TVs work, by scanning one line at a time. The rate at which rows of LEDs are scanned is so fast that the human eye cannot see it—but a fast shutter speed on the camera will show it to a greater or lesser degree. (THe faster the shutter, the fewer rows of LEDs will be on while the shutter is open). Take the worst case: If the LEDs are being scanned at, say, 1KHz (which would be the /slow/ end—a more likely figure would be 10KHz or more.), and there are, say, 10 rows of LEDs (which is also at the low end: A high-res display will probably have 20 or 30 or more, I'm guessing?) So, each row is on for 1/1000 of a second; to get all 10 lines on in the frame, you would need a shutter speed slower than 10/1000 or 1/100 to get them. In the best case (not very likely, in other words!): At 10KHz and 10 rows, you would need a shutter speed slower than 10 x (1/10000) = 1/1000 which isn't so bad. But you'll never see that case!

[clem24]

Grant,

 

Invest in fast glass. Even if the 70-300 is "every bit as good as the 70-200 IS", it doesn't matter cause at say, 200mm, the 70-300 is more than 2 stops slower than the 70-200. I used to have the 70-300 and sold it promptly. Of course, the 70-200 is NOT a good traveling lens because it's big and heavy and has very limited uses. Since you're not traveling with it, I also don't really recommend the 18-200mm for the same reason - it's slow especially at full tele. As well, for me, I will never buy a variable aperture lens because I shoot manual mode all the time. The only variable aperture lens I have is exactly that one - the 18-200, but I only take it when I travel.

 

My suggestion: skip the D90, D5000, and whatever else. And since you can't afford the D300, find a good used D200 body. There's probably a ton of those floating around, and here in Canada, they can be had for as little as < $600 USD used. They have very fast focusing system (just make sure to use the center AF zone which uses a much faster cross-type sensor). Then get a used lens like the old Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8, which is usually only about $500 USD. I have the push-pull version, and the great thing about it is that it is TACK SHARP (probably the sharpest lens I have) and focuses quite quickly on the D200 even if it's a screw-drive type AF lens. These are also fairly cheap as well. For a more close up lens, I would recommend the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 or the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. The advantage of the Sigma is that you can use it in very dark places, it's fairly cheap, and it's also TACK SHARP even when wide open.

 

Anyway, going with a used D200 ($600) + 80-200 ($500) + 17-50 ($400) will set you back $1,500 but now you've got a kit with very fast glass and for about the same price as a D90 + 18-200. The D200 is a very tough camera (magnesium + weatherproofing) and the 80-200 is built like a tank. The should provide years of service.

 

The other option I'd suggest is finding a used Canon 30D with a 17-55mm f/2.8 IS (an amazing "sleeper" lens and often skipped by many because it isn't an "L" lens) and the 70-200 f/4 but that'll probably cost you a little more dough. Don't be turned off by the older bodies. They all have really good ISO performance (the D200 is excellent at 800 and still very usable at 1600). And the advantage of the D200 over the D90 and D5000 is that it's a more advanced body and has much better AF performance.

 

The other option that I would recommend if you want to travel light is to go with the Panasonic GF-1 with a 20mm f/1.7. It's not a cheap kit, but it's AF performance is extremely fast for a contrast detect-type system and it's ISO performance is superb even past 800. And it's so tiny and light that you can slip it into your pocket.

[gmat]

Thank you CaptOblivious and clem24.

 

From your suggestion, I looked into the D60 as well as the D300, but am still leaning towards the D90 as a first camera. I'll look at a used D60 body or even a D300 body (another year saving) as a second camera. I'm wondering if a used camera would be reliable.

I'm pretty rough on a camera so a durable one might be useful, but a cheaper body or lens might be easier to replace. I would carry the Nikon camera in my backpack while I cycle to my classes or walked with my wife.  With my current Samsung, I often shoot birds, turtles and trains and photos of things to show my students. I carry it in my shirt pocket or backpack and recently, it has gotten wet from rain, high humidity and sweat. I use the camera to show my photos to my students. I don't have a lap top.

Thank you,

Best wishes,

Grant

[Guest ___]

Grant,

 

Invest in fast glass. Even if the 70-300 is "every bit as good as the 70-200 IS", it doesn't matter cause at say, 200mm, the 70-300 is more than 2 stops slower than the 70-200. I used to have the 70-300 and sold it promptly. Of course, the 70-200 is NOT a good traveling lens because it's big and heavy and has very limited uses. Since you're not traveling with it, I also don't really recommend the 18-200mm for the same reason - it's slow especially at full tele. As well, for me, I will never buy a variable aperture lens because I shoot manual mode all the time. The only variable aperture lens I have is exactly that one - the 18-200, but I only take it when I travel.

 

Clem, note that there is a major price gap between the 70-300 at $500 verses the 70-200 at $1800. From gmat price IS an issue. If a D3000 with a 70-300 is out of his price range, then a 70-200iis clearly not an option. In his case, an 18-200 is perfectly fine for a walk around camera lens, specially since he is upgrading from a PoS. Speed for neither the 70-300 or 18-200 are an issue as both are VRII lenses with 4-stop gains. Lens speed plays a less critical role now than several years ago thanks to VR.

[Guest ___]

Clem, note that there is a major price gap between the 70-300 at $500 verses the 70-200 at $1800. From gmat price IS an issue. If a D3000 with a 70-300 is out of his price range, then a 70-200iis clearly not an option. In his case, an 18-200 is perfectly fine for a walk around camera lens, specially since he is upgrading from a PoS. Speed for neither the 70-300 or 18-200 are an issue as both are VRII lenses with 4-stop gains. Lens speed plays a less critical role now than several years ago thanks to VR.

 

I would not recommend the prosumer grade 80-200 f/2.8 push-pull zoom macro. Lens creep in those were horrible, hence why I gave mine back to the prop room. The old model will not work in any of the newer cameras as Nikon is doing away with motors in all camera bodies except the pro-lines. So this lens will not work in many current and future dSLR, and in none of the new line of hdSLR due out in the fall. Also still at $500, this would limit his ability to to buy a decent mid-range zoom, or even a wide.

[clem24]

Clem, note that there is a major price gap between the 70-300 at $500 verses the 70-200 at $1800. From gmat price IS an issue. If a D3000 with a 70-300 is out of his price range, then a 70-200iis clearly not an option. In his case, an 18-200 is perfectly fine for a walk around camera lens, specially since he is upgrading from a PoS. Speed for neither the 70-300 or 18-200 are an issue as both are VRII lenses with 4-stop gains. Lens speed plays a less critical role now than several years ago thanks to VR.

 

I only mentioned the 70-200 but never actually recommended a purchase of one. As for the VR comment, keep in mind VR is not a solution for OP's problem: shooting a moving train in low light conditions. 4 stop gains... Yes when your subject is STATIONARY. When the subject is moving, VR is useless IMHO. Sure they have some fancy mode for tracking moving subjects but honestly, I've never been able to get any decent shots of this variety with VR enabled and shutter speeds of say 1/15 or even 1/30 by panning the camera. By that time, I might as well bump up ISO and choose faster glass. VR is not a substitute for fast glass, end of story. IMHO, VR helps at the long tele end where hand shake will show up clearly in photos. But it does nothing to help when your subject is moving. Some may argue this point, but from all the VR/IS lenses I've used, I will ALWAYS take the faster glass without VR/IS over stabilized glass and slower f stop. VR of course has it's virtues, but it's not always the solution.

 

Your comment reminds of this Panasonic print ad I saw for their MEGA O.I.S. system. The ad showed a picture supposedly taken at a concert and the crowd is perfectly sharp. They somehow imply that O.I.S can get sharp photos of moving subjects with shutter speeds of 1/15. Very misleading ad. Same kind of ad with the new Sony "sweep panorama", where the panorama was the picture of the crowd at a concert and everyone was perfectly sharp... I laughed when I saw that ad. I think you'd need ISO6400 and f/.5 to get that kind of shot in a fast, sweeping motion LOL.

 

I would not recommend the prosumer grade 80-200 f/2.8 push-pull zoom macro. Lens creep in those were horrible, hence why I gave mine back to the prop room. The old model will not work in any of the newer cameras as Nikon is doing away with motors in all camera bodies except the pro-lines. So this lens will not work in many current and future dSLR, and in none of the new line of hdSLR due out in the fall. Also still at $500, this would limit his ability to to buy a decent mid-range zoom, or even a wide.

 

There are many variants of the 80-200 f/2.8. I personally like the push-pull because it zooms so fast, is so sharp, and everyone that is selling it seems to sell for much cheaper than the zoom ring variants. I think lens creep in this guy is a non-issue (for me at least) because all the elements are within the lens itself. It's ironic that you recommend the 18-200 because that is by far the worst when it comes to zoom creep, though I think they've addressed some of it in the VRII design. My 80-200 is really awesome. I used to hate the push-pull, but I've definitely grown to love it. If it just wasn't so heavy and the fact that I hardly ever use those kinds of focal lengths for everyday shooting.

 

Also, I don't believe Nikon will ever phase out in-body motors in their upper end cameras, at least not for the next 10 years. They will alienate a huge amount of pros if they do. The reason why they got rid of the motor in cheaper bodies is because the market that buys these don't have legacy lenses and are usually people just starting out. That and the fact that they can make the body much more compact.

 

Lastly, for shooting trains, a wide is completely unnecessary. I've never used a wide for shooting trains, but... I do love my wide and use it quite often. Just not for trains. I think the 17-50 f/2.8 is a perfect focal length for shooting trains. Wide enough to get a stationary train, and long enough to get moving ones. Plus fast glass to boot. The 18-200 is just too slow, plus add to the fact that I shoot in manual mode and the variable aperture drives me insane!!!  

 

Good discussion!  

[gmat]

Shashinka,

Thank you for your comments. I also find it interesting to hear about cameras and lens that are out of my price range and why people might consider them worthy of consideration. What you use and why you like them or why you may not like them helps to educate me.

Is the jump from 200 to 300 worth it? I do sometimes like to take those compressed head on shots.

Thanks again.

Best wishes,

Grant

[clem24]

Is the jump from 200 to 300 worth it? I do sometimes like to take those compressed head on shots.

 

Haha you don't need 300 to get compressed head shots. If you want those compressed head shots with blurry backgrounds, go for the 50mm f/1.8. But.. If you're like me, you won't use it. 50mm is a weird focal length for crop cameras. I prefer the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, which is a great all around lens and is closer to the classic 50mm focal length. For taking portraits of people I prefer being close to them rather than using a tele. Tele tends to make people and pictures very flat. There's an old saying that I abide by: "if your picture isn't good enough, you're not close enough", or somewhere along those lines.

 

Also, 200 and 300 isn't really that different, believe it or not. When we're talking about crop bodies, it's a HUGE difference in terms of mm (it's actually the equivalent of 300mm vs. 450mm which is basically ~8.5x zoom vs. ~13x in layman's terms). But I've honestly never felt the need for such a long lens. Even with my 200, I hardly ever shoot at 200, though if you're taking pics of rail yards from afar, then sure the 300 could make a difference.

[Guest ___]

Shashinka,

Thank you for your comments. I also find it interesting to hear about cameras and lens that are out of my price range and why people might consider them worthy of consideration. What you use and why you like them or why you may not like them helps to educate me.

Is the jump from 200 to 300 worth it? I do sometimes like to take those compressed head on shots.

Thanks again.

Best wishes,

Grant

 

Sorry for the delay, I had complications due to surgery gone bad.

 

The 70-200 isd the professional lens with a fixed f/2.8 which is great for low light while the 70-300 is a varied aperture lens, 4.5-5.6 so it is not as good in low light, but is lighter in weight, good for travel, but image quality overall is no where near as good as the 70-200. The faster the lens, the faster shutter speed you can use. The 70-200 f/2.8 is much better at capturing trains in low light or at high speed than the 70-300 is.

 

Typically unless, you're a stalker, the 70-105mm range is used for head shots. I mean, in order to take a close-up head shot with 200 or even 300mm, you'd have to be back away pretty far.

 

BTW: If you plan to do video out of the D90, there are hotshoe mounted constant lighting options out there for as low as thirty dollars. They do not throw much light out and may not be good for railroad video recording, but some of the bigger units in the hundred to two hundred range can throw a good bit of light out there for trains. This is an example of a cheap low-powered model, but there are some that can really throw a lot of light. http://www.amazon.com/SUNPAK-RL-20-Readylite-Super-Compact/dp/B00006JQBU 

[gmat]

Shashinka,

Thank you for your comments. I don't think that an expensive lens is in my near future, but the information is welcome. I've heard that confirmation of the D95 might come in August and it sounds tempting, but wonder how soon it will appear in stores. Probably whichever camera I choose will by my sole one for a long time.

Sorry, but are we talking about the same kind of head shots? I like it when you have a 300mm lens and shoot the train coming straight at you. Can you get the same effect with a 105mm lens? Video shoots sound interesting, but I think that I can only afford to shoot photos for the time being.

Thank you again,

Best wishes,

Grant

[cteno4]

BTW: If you plan to do video out of the D90, there are hotshoe mounted constant lighting options out there for as low as thirty dollars. They do not throw much light out and may not be good for railroad video recording, but some of the bigger units in the hundred to two hundred range can throw a good bit of light out there for trains. This is an example of a cheap low-powered model, but there are some that can really throw a lot of light. http://www.amazon.com/SUNPAK-RL-20-Readylite-Super-Compact/dp/B00006JQBU 

 

I seriously doubt you can use any portable lights for anything with train video except maybe an interior shot. the video producer i work with wont do lights inside with powerful plug in systems over like 10-15' as the inverse square rule just nails you and you start to get odd effects (unless you have a full movie studio lighting!). she tries to get as much natural light and building light as possible, pick her angles and time of day carefully as well if a larger space requires a nice shot. if you do get any effect at intermediate distance its probably going to be in the form of seeing a flash light circle on something or a strong spot reflection, both of which you dont want...

 

portable lighting like those only get you a bit of hilighting or fill at pretty close distances and usually not really flattering lighting as well. sometimes can work for a human head shot, but then with the light source at the lens where they are looking you get major direct squinting!

 

cheers

 

jeff

[Guest ___]

Again, though that's the trade-off for light and portable, which is better than nothing. There's an old saying, "Crap is better than nothing"

[cteno4]

Again, though that's the trade-off for light and portable, which is better than nothing. There's an old saying, "Crap is better than nothing"

 

if it wont increase the exposure of the overall picture (or worse fake the sensor out to think its brighter than it is from a hot spot reflection) and give you a couple of artifacts to boot thats just making things worse.

 

just dont think at more than 10' you are going to get anything from a portable lamp, especially a smaller one. most of the head sots are going to be dozens of yards away.

 

would work well to shoot details up close on a platform. having someone else hold the light at different angles can also work well too to bring out details with some lighting contrast.

 

cheers

 

jeff

[gmat]

It's been over a year since I got the Nikon D90 and 70-200mm lens. Some notes on shooting in poor lighting. I often take photos after teaching, which means in the early evening or at night at the last station on the way home. With platform lighting, I can shoot stationary trains reasonably well, but using the flash helps. I also shoot moving trains as they pass thru the station using the station lighting. Using the flash is strictly verboten as it would interfere with the driver's vision. Someone at Shinjuku Station had scolded me even though at the time I wasn't shooting at a moving train. He wasn't in a uniform so I don't know just in mufti. I had tried not to shoot at the driver in a moving train, but I guess once a flash goes off, it's easy to get annoyed even if it wasn't aimed at you. Someone advised me to push the ISO but save for one time, I haven't done it further.

One problem day or night is the dead zone of about 15-20 meters around you (triple at night) where the camera autofocus finds hard to focus in time to get the shot and the photos come out blurred. Any suggestions on how to get around this?

I've tried the manual focusing, but unlike the old split viewer, the new lens and my failing eyes make it difficult to focus properly on moving trains.

On the problem of LED train signs, I've found that 1/80 will almost always guarantee a good shot, but under low light conditions, the short will often turn out too dark, but then the auto e posure will slow the shutter speed. So problem mostly solved.

[KenS]

What ISO do you shoot at?  While there is more noise at higher ISOs, that's relatively minor on a DSLR at much higher ISOs than film (my Canon looks quite good at 800 ISO).  You can shoot a test image with a lens cap on to see noise at different settings to get a feel for your camera's limits.

 

If you know something's going to be at a specific distance, turning off autofocus and manually setting it in advance can work.  Of course with a train coming at you, you probably can't time it precisely enough to do that. Light levels (i.e., dim light) can cause difficulty with autofocus and that's probably part of the problem.

 

See this page for some sports photography tips that might be helpful.

[gmat]

Thanks KenS,

 

I use the auto feature so I don't really know the ISO settings used at night. I checked on some night shots that are on the card that I used last night and one at dusk on a very overcast day with little platform light had an ISO of 1600. It looked OK but was a little grainy. One shot later but with the headlights turned on was at ISO 400. Lots of times, the situation is pretty unplanned, so I don't take the time to preset things. Oddly enough, things seemed much simpler when I used my F2. Perhaps because I didn't try to shoot in such conditions. 

Thank you for the tip on the page. I'll try some of the pointers out.

 

I have your Sumida Crossing page on the 'Contemporary JR East Limited Express and “Joyful” Trains' on my desktop as I referred to it often to get myself straight on the different models.

 

Best wishes,

Grant

[KenS]

Thanks. Those pages really just summarize wikipedia pages and may not be complete although I tried to include all of the JR trains.  If you spot anything missing, drop me an email or PM. I really need to add material on the non-JR Kanto-region railroads too, someday. I just added a page on subway lines, so that's a start.

 

When I first bought my DSLR I used it in shutter priority mode, which auto-sets everything except shutter speed, despite having fairly extensive experience with an old film SLR, because it made things so much easier but still let me force a fast (1/250 or better) shutter to avoid blurring.  With practice I now do more things manually when the situation calls for it, but still fall back to Shutter Priority as my default. But I also now set the ISO (mine allows it to be set to "auto" or a specific value seperately from the exposure mode).  I do that because 1600 is a bit noisy and I prefer to pick it myself if I need it. Some of my early photos had problems due to the wrong ISO being preferred by the camera. A fixed high ISO like 800 can over-expose really bright outdoor scenes, and I usuallly check the settings SP mode picks for a given place and lighting before taking a photo; my camera does that by pressing the shutter button halfway. But it's still better than what I was getting with the camera picking the ISO.

 

Bright light sources like headlights can really throw-off auto-exposure mode.  That's a situation where I'd read the environment's light with the camera's meter and pick manual settings before the train arrived (maybe even manual focus, but mainly the ISO/shutter/F-stop settings).  I do that more by "feel" than trying to think through the relationships between the three (which are simple and explained in every basic photo book, but were never intuitive for me).  I just adjust things to get the shutter speed I want, and the most depth-of-field (largest F-stop number) that will keep the meter close to center.