Ken Roackwell

A

afcno9

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7
Edit My Images
Yes
So does this chap talk sense? Is he a professional photographer?
 
Errr..............err..................err....................:thinking:

He's certainly not a professional photographer....:lol:
 
The reason I ask is because I am looking at dslr's. I am thingking of getting a d40. But it doesnt have exposure bracketing. Does it have spot metering? These to things seem important as you gain in skill. I have done Alevel photography but that was 15 yrs ago. Also my father is a pro photographer. So hopefully looking to start a new hobby.

Any thought or suggestions. I only have £250 though. :|
 
Ken Rockwell is a god among men.


Serious note: bring a large wheelbarrow of salt with you when you go to read his site
 
Ken is very polarised in his opinions, sometimes he talks sense other times he talk's complete twaddle. His opinion is never middle of the road, something is either the best thing in the world ever or the worst thing in the world.
 
I reckon for a great many things, especially for a beginner, it would do no harm to trust his judgement. His advice is as good as any, though he may be right, he may be wrong. I'd suggest taking on board what he says and in time you'll learn where you agree or disagree with him.
 
I bought a D40 on the back of Ken's advice and it certainly was a decent camera, but he does play back its drawbacks. For me, the lack of internal focus motor was a major drawback. It meant the 50mm f/1.8 (which is now one of my favourite lenses), and a whole back catalogue of none af-s lenses, really wasnt much use. I wouldnt worry massively about bracketing, you can do it manually, although it is a 'nice to have' it isnt a must have. 3 focus points was also a tad on the low side. If I were to start over I probably would have gone for a 2nd hand D50, which in my mind was a far superior camera. If I had I dont think I would have ended up upgrading to the D300 quite so quickly.

A lot depends on what you want to do with your photography. I certainly learnt a lot with the D40 and it was a very cheap way of getting into what is turning out to be a bloody expensive hobby. I have also taken some stuff I am very pleased with with that camera.

As for Ken, definitely take his site with a pinch of salt. There's a lot of good info in there but it is very biased and, as said, something is either the best in the world ever or totally worthless.
 
andrewc said:
I've never read so much mis-informed and biased crap in my life. Just because he's got a popular website, it doesn't mean its contents are accurate or true.
Click to expand...
Look, don't hold back, speak your mind:)
 
i like his site at least it gives you some idea

whenever ime looking at something to buy i always read his opinions.

for nikon though i also use nikonians and photography in Malaysia who also give good opinions

hes only giving his view you can of course disagree
 
I justy tried to look for Ken Roakwell. Hmm- yes of course- It's Ken Rockwell - still never heard of him.
 
I think KR is quite entertaining. I like the fact that he doesn't sit on the fence; if he likes something he says so, and if he doesn't like it he says so. I don't always agree with him, but the fact that I know very clearly where he stands means it's easy to examine my reasoning to see whether it holds up.
 
Dont know this Ken Roackwell fella but Ken Rockwell's alright.

Saved me buying a crap lens and instead showed me the light with the 24-70 f2.8 which has proved itself to be amazing in every way.

His review of the dinky plastic G lens ( http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-80mm-g.htm?refby=rflAID021866&sku=NK2880AFGU ) sounds silly, how can a cheap throw away lens be any good, esp on a D3 ? But I had one sitting in the cupboard and threw it on my D700 to see if it was any good and jesus - its a cracker!

So just goes to show he does know what he's talking about, probably knows more than a lot of you guys put together (and me included). He's not as polarised as some people, like POAH for instance :D
 
His lens reviews are mostly very good. His insistence on the 18-200 VR being the best lens since sliced bread is a bit dubious but aside from that, he has a lot of technical and historical information on a lot of lenses and if only for that, it's a very useful site. Is he misinformed? I don't think that's fair. Biased? Absolutely. Although he does say the Canon 5D is the best landscape and portrait camera ever. But like Foggy says, everything he reviews is generally the best thing or worst thing in the world and rarely just "not bad".
 
Take his opinions with a pinch of salt and don`t think he is unreasonable, a bit like some of the techies on here, they all have an opinion and are worth consideration, it does not make them always right.

Just my thrupennybit.......:)
 
I don't beleive to any reviewer sites. Specially not the big ones, as Dpreview, Imagin recources and so on. I'm sure they get some money from company which they reviewing. Everything what I search to buy, I read on forums, or from some I personaly know.
 
There's a lot of hyperbole but you can't deny it's entertaining and, at times, quite informative.
 
His camera user guides are good. Simple and easy to follow unlike the ones that come with the camera itself, but he is a bit bombastic at times.

Andy
 
I enjoy Ken's reviews, I find them light hearted. As long as you remember they are only his opinions then you'l be fine.
 
afcno9 said:
. Also my father is a pro photographer. So hopefully looking to start a new hobby.

Any thought or suggestions. I only have £250 though. :|
Click to expand...

talk to your dad ?
 
Some of his advice may be good but there's way too much crap there to make anything he says trustworthy (IMO).
 
[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]KEN ROCKWELL: I never shoot raw. Why would I? Raw is a waste of time and space, and doesn't look any better than JPG even when you can open the files. [/FONT]
Click to expand...
:thinking:
 
Quite amusing when a Rockwell thread turns up. It's quite ironic that he gets a fair bit of abuse heading his way, usually from people complaining he is too opinionated.

Fair play to the guy is my personal view, has turned a personal site into a pretty big thing. He has never pretended to be a accurate unbiased reviewer, never hidden behind a generic website name as a faceless reviewer, seems to wear his heart on his sleeve, can't knock that. I've never got why people complain that he isn't always an accurate, unbiased reviewer when he doesn't claim to be. If I started blogging movie reviews and it happened to become hugely popular, would that make my opinions any less valid?

As has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, his 'camera guides' are brilliant, if nothing else he deserves a job making online manuals for cameras.
 
I think he's improved a lot. He can come out with some crap, but he tends to do it deliberately so they go nuts on DPReview and send him lots of hit, I'm sure :)

I think his wide angle lens round-up is very well done for example.

He's actually quite a nice bloke too.

You have to take as you find, and in the Nikon world I only really read him, Thom Hogan and Bjarne Roslett.
 
Think of it like having a conversation with your friend. It's cool to have one and you hope the majority is true but just to be on the safe side, you have a conversation with another friend before you do anything drastic ;)
 
The guy's a Nikon marketing manager's wet dream.

Ignore him if you want to do more than happysnapping.


Though, having said that, some of his older film camera advice was actually well founded and useful, he just seems to have lost the plot in the digital world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top