Ken Rockwell - Godsent or Moron?

petemc said:
I'm going to keep posting this until people read it :p



http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm
Click to expand...

OK so you like the goofball, we get it.

Why does he not include this disclaimer with every single lens or other piece of kit he pretends to review so we can all know that the "review" is actually a waste of time...

That way we can surf our way down to the digital picture or photozone straight away and not waste bandwidth on idiotic rambling posing to be something sensible...:bonk:
 
antonroland said:
OK so you like the goofball, we get it.
Click to expand...

Clearly not. My point wasn't that I like or dislike him. It was that he says on his site that his articles are full of stuff he makes up. Its all a joke with hints of truth. Pinch of salt. Accept that, find a real review site and stop complaining about the guy. :p
 
I have to say as a newbie, his guide, review and how to set up my D40 was excellent. Made everything seem much easier than the manual:thumbs:

I think fair play to the bloke, in this day and age it seems all too easy to knock people.
 
Blapto said:
A few things that he writes are useful. His lens reviews are good overviews.

He does come up with some right odd stuff though:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-killed-my-tripod.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nm/aliens/index.htm

A lot of what he writes is downright misleading for people new to photography.
Click to expand...


He must be in the same church as that baby faced hollywood actor Tom watsisname, you know the one he does all those stupid stunts with trains helicopters and motorbikes that make me sigh with disbelief.:cuckoo:
 
I realize it's a pretty old thread but I thought I refresh it. Reason being is that I'm a noob and from what I read here some/much of the stuff Ken puts on his site is B/S and reading it myself I obviously didn't spot anything like that. Ken's page was probably the first one I came across with what I thought was a useful analysis and recommendations for the beginners.

I'm refreshing the topic to ask what are other pages you would recommend for someone new to DSLR photography? Meaning pages that you don't need a B/S detector for :)
 
Michal said:
Meaning pages that you don't need a B/S detector for :)
Click to expand...

Well, you need a built in B/S detector in this world :D

Welcome aboard :thumbs:

Personally, this forum has helped me tremendously, so if you have a question, locate the relevant forum section and fire away.
 
Michal said:
I'm refreshing the topic to ask what are other pages you would recommend for someone new to DSLR photography? Meaning pages that you don't need a B/S detector for :)
Click to expand...

These pages right here. There is oddles of experience in this place and most people will take time to answer any question you throw at them.

Stick around and you'll learn plenty :thumbs:
 
I like him. I think he winds some people up with articles like this:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/why-we-love-film.htm#rez

Where he points out that his 1956 Kodak Retina produces better images than a Nikon D3 (which I expect it does). People who have spent a lot of money on a D3 (or similar) will get very defensive about it.

And I love this quote: "It seems digital cameras are all about the freedom to make pictures that suck, at no cost.".

Definitely needs to be read as it was written. i.e. tongue in cheek but there is a lot of stuff there which makes sense.


Steve.
 
I like his reviews ,

but as a novice I read all reviews :thumbs:

He knows his stuff alright , not done me any harm ;)
 
i have read a little of what he writes, and to be truthful i would rather ask you guys on here than try and decipher what he writes.
 
I have to say i only ever read the occasional review on his site and find them pretty useful (especially the roundups). They give some proper hands on real world discussion, which is obviously bias to his usage and opinions but help just as much as the more technical reviews from places like photozone.

I just love the fact he doesn't take it seriously and can write some good information in something that is actually fun to read, a very good writer IMO. :lol:

Michal, a couple of good sites to have a look at is photozone.de and the-digital-picture.com for proper no BS reviews. :)
 
Steve Smith said:
And I love this quote: "It seems digital cameras are all about the freedom to make pictures that suck, at no cost.".
Click to expand...
I agree with that wholeheartedly.

But I find I agree with what Ken writes a lot more than I disagree with it.
 
I like Ken Rockwell. He absolutely knows what he's talking about, and speaks his mind.

Not many people have the former qualification ;) Plus he's interesting, and entertaining.
 
Voyager said:
But I find I agree with what Ken writes a lot more than I disagree with it.
Click to expand...

Me too.

He's one of those people whose writing style makes you want to argue with him although he is usually right.... A bit like Roger Hicks.


Steve.
 
Nikon Man said:
He must be in the same church as that baby faced hollywood actor Tom watsisname, you know the one he does all those stupid stunts with trains helicopters and motorbikes that make me sigh with disbelief.:cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Tom and Jerry??;)
Whats the church thing got to do with it?
 
You gotta love 'the Rock'!! Generally a good read, and maybe the only photography read online that doesn't make me always feel like buying new gear...
 
I dont think theres anything wrong with him to be honest. He gives advice based on his opinion, which is what most people do.

Knock him all you want, but he owns an absolute s***load of gear i could only dream of, i think he just gets people backs up because he can show reasons why the £1000 lens you just bought may not necessarily make a better image than a kit lens, and people who are gear proud dont like that.
 
xil3 said:
Just curious to see what other people think about him.

I personally think that he partially knows what he's talking about, but his articles are too bias, which really tend to **** me off. Therefore, I'm saying MORON! :|
Click to expand...

If you read carefully of how and what he writes, then you would see that his target audience is not the advanced amatures but mostly casual shooters. People who don't know what spot metering is and don't have an immediate plan to find out ... In other words, 99% of his advice is quite applicable for beginners or ordinary people who kust picked up the camera for the very first time. True the D700 is going to look weird in the hands of complete beginner but then some people do tend to spend a lot of money to get the best gear even if they don't have skills - here is where "uncle" Ken's advice is best suited...
 
I was vaguely aware of him, but had never visited his site.

I love a windup merchant so will be visiting now on a regular basis.

Not that it's hard to do, but I love anyone with a mischeivous sense of humour that gets photographers squabbling over nothing like a bunch of boys in the playground.

They should print his face on money. :D
 
I quite like the guy. Obviously he's very opininated and as photography is in no way an exact science other people are going to disagree with him on a lot of issues. A lot of his comments are very specific to the type of photography he does so may not be applicable to wedding and portrait photographers.

I read his articles for entertainment as much as information, and anything he tells me I'll probably have read a balancing argument somewhere else.

As always, I find the best way to improve my photography is to go out and try something myself. It doesn't matter how strong an opinion other people have on a subject, just shoot in whatever fashion, with whatever equipment works for you.
 
dalex_257 said:
If you read carefully of how and what he writes, then you would see that his target audience is not the advanced amatures but mostly casual shooters. People who don't know what spot metering is and don't have an immediate plan to find out ... In other words, 99% of his advice is quite applicable for beginners or ordinary people who kust picked up the camera for the very first time. True the D700 is going to look weird in the hands of complete beginner but then some people do tend to spend a lot of money to get the best gear even if they don't have skills - here is where "uncle" Ken's advice is best suited...
Click to expand...

I can't agree that his target audience is casual shooters. They do not frequent photo websites, and if they did they would have no understanding of even what a D700 was, what spot metering was, or what Ken's unfathomable fondness for Leicas is all about.

Ken is all about advanced amateurs, like TP, who do know what spot metering is - because they've read that it's good it in sales literature - and get all unnecessary when somebody says it's a waste of time. (Which it is :D )

I love that. He knows it winds people up, but he doesn't bother to qualify it, just leaves it hanging there to get people going ;)
 
After moving to Nikon, I was dissapointed Rockwell was no Bob Atkins.... I used to love Bob's website!
 
Monkey said:
i think he just gets people backs up because he can show reasons why the £1000 lens you just bought may not necessarily make a better image than a kit lens, and people who are gear proud dont like that.
Click to expand...
I think there is a lot of truth in that.
 
I'm bringing this to the top because I was about to ask the Forum view on Ken Rockwell.

Personally, I love his site. He really does tell it like it is (or at least how I perceive it).

His love of the D90 over the D300 is what made me dismiss the D300. It then became D90 v D700 v D3.

If I buy a D90 I know I'll wish I'd bought FX.

If I buy a D700 I'm hoping I'll be satisfied (I know I will be)

If I buy a D3 my wife will kill me but she'll have a great camera for the funeral.
 
He's got his tongue firmly in cheek on many occasions and after all, it's his website so he's entitled to write what he likes, especially as he has no affiliation with any manufacturer. It's just that he gets a lot of traffic through his site that it gets seen as a bit of a haven for Nikonian knowledge and therefore biased towards anything Nikon.

I like him but I don't take his word as gospel, only as a rough guide from a guy who's obviously passionate about Nikon gear
 
budfox said:
His love of the D90 over the D300 is what made me dismiss the D300. It then became D90 v D700 v D3.

If I buy a D90 I know I'll wish I'd bought FX.

If I buy a D700 I'm hoping I'll be satisfied (I know I will be)

If I buy a D3 my wife will kill me but she'll have a great camera for the funeral.
Click to expand...

How much are you prepared to spend?

If money's no object get a D3.

If money comes into it buy a D700.

If money's tight - buy a D300, not a D90. There's been a recent thread comparing the D90 and D300 - might be worth hunting it down and getting some alternative opinions to Ken Rockwell. I like the guy for what he is - but on this one, personally I think he's wrong.
 
aberal said:
How much are you prepared to spend?
I like the guy for what he is - but on this one, personally I think he's wrong.
Click to expand...

Then you've opened my eyes to the D300 again, but I just know I want FX. The reason, as I've stated before is the supreme ISO performance and wide angle abilities of FX.

Of course, I want a D3, but I won't take better images with it and the £1300 difference will buy me a fine bit of glass (probably a few bits, decent primes from a while back for starters).

Thanks though.
 
budfox said:
Then you've opened my eyes to the D300 again, but I just know I want FX. The reason, as I've stated before is the supreme ISO performance and wide angle abilities of FX.

Of course, I want a D3, but I won't take better images with it and the £1300 difference will buy me a fine bit of glass (probably a few bits, decent primes from a while back for starters).

Thanks though.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree - if you can afford the D700 you won't regret it, not for a milisecond. I think the point I was making though, given the title of the thread, is that Ken Rockwell isn't always right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top