Ken Rockwell: Idiot?

[Artful Dodger]

FWIW when I have looked at his site it's for the same reason(s) I look through the forum here. What equipment and or lens is each person using, how are they using it and how is the composition. I don't care what is said because when looking for a lens, such as the Tokina 11-16 for my D50, I want to know or more so see how the end result is no matter who takes the picture(s). This gave me a reference point to go look around in other sites and see the test results of said lens and get a wide variety of images so that I could see the good from the attempted effort(s) that were questionable. Could his site be misleading? Not like Wiki can't do the same at times now can't it…

Funny thing propaganda, it sells, grows, dies down and rebuilds all the time just like some sites out there. Maybe I'm too visual coming from a fine art painting background but the images matter most and the verbiage is all bonus

I will add that it's not just his site with off the cuff information. I went to the local camera shop and the one gentleman made a strong comment that nobody uses manual anymore on DSLR's because auto is just too good so there is no need to even learn manual settings. Now this is coming from a SLR user only, he doesn't even own a DSLR and has his BFA in photography. I'm sure the look I gave him was like some give the screen after reading some of the things on the web. Just food for thought.

 

[El Cabong]

He started the website as a joke. Why is everyone in such a hissy fit over this guy?

Whatever his original intentions with his website, what it is now is a willfully inconsistent mix of opinion, hearsay, deception mixed with the occasional fact, that people nevertheless go to and recommend as a source for camera information and advice, despite his thinly veiled attempt to inoculate himself from any criticism by saying everything is a joke. It's just irritating.

Am I calling for his head? No. Am I calling him a jackass? Yes. Yes, I did.

Yeah, no need to make a huge deal over KR. He promotes his views, just like any other photographer would that is passionate about what they do. [...] He does legitimate comparisons like many other sources you are able to go to instead. But just like many other sources, he promotes his beliefs and his character.

Though I disagree with many of his shifting opinions, I had a particular problem with his latest lens review, which was described in the original post. Art is one thing, and is subjective, whereas a review of gear, particularly lenses, which have measurable qualities, should be less so. To state conclusions with minimal evidence that fly in the face of what others have found, including the company that makes the freaking lenses, bothers me, because I'm certain that many who read the site won't do further research.

I do know that there are worse things in the world than a jovial liar on the Internet that makes money by being an entertaining blowhard, but I still don't like the guy. Sorry.

Gee, you seem to take it really personally that he prefers the handling of Nikon cameras to Canons. (What camera brand do you own? ) He doesn't bash Canon, he just prefers Nikon. If anything, he basically ignores anything but Canon and Nikon when it comes to dslrs.

Gee, you're making a tempest in a teacup here: you don't like him, fine with me. But he tells everyone in advance that everything is his own opinion and should be taken with a grain of salt. (And I don't think going the pseudo-philosophical route is particularly fruitful.)

No. They're actually directed at people like you who apparently take him more seriously than he does himself.

Gee, you like using the word "gee" in your arguments. Also, you seem to take it really personally that people dislike Ken Rockwell (i.e. you're not "fine" with it at all). You're pretty serious about defending the guy you say shouldn't be taken seriously.

 

[Ken Rockwell]

Rockwell?

I have no idea why so many people read me. It must have something to do with being bored at work.

I wasn't invited to Solms because Leica hates me because I tell it like it is. Just read my reviews of the SUMMARIT-M, for instance. They probably think differently, now they their site links to my M9 example photos. Maybe next release.

Have fun!
Ken

 

[smacdag]

what's wrong with a NIKON D40?

 

[iTiki]

what's wrong with a NIKON D40?

Nothing is wrong with a D40. Great camera at even a greater price. I would love to see how many of the so called "experts" on these forums even live up to half of the potential of whatever camera they are using. I have seen some amazing images taken with a D40 (or lesser camera) in the hands of someone who really knows what they are doing.

 

[mac 2005]

I have no idea why so many people read me. It must have something to do with being bored at work.

I wasn't invited to Solms because Leica hates me because I tell it like it is. Just read my reviews of the SUMMARIT-M, for instance. They probably think differently, now they their site links to my M9 example photos. Maybe next release.

Have fun!
Ken

If Leica has an opinion of you at all, it's probably . You're simply not a credible source of photography-related information. If you're going to make it clear that the only thing you have to offer the art/business/industry of photography is a poorly executed joke expressed in the form of a Web site, then you shouldn't be surprised by anyone's lack of regard for you or your opinion.

 

[jared_kipe]

How could you replace a 12-24mm lens with a 24mm lens?

This photo was taken at 12mm (Sigma 12-24mmEX) on a full frame body, and I marked off the portion that was taken at 24mm (Canon 24-105mmL).

How many steps back would you have to go to get the same image at 24mm? The world may never know.

 

[Drag'nGT]

How could you replace a 12-24mm lens with a 24mm lens?

This photo was taken at 12mm (Sigma 12-24mmEX) on a full frame body, and I marked off the portion that was taken at 24mm (Canon 24-105mmL).

How many steps back would you have to go to get the same image at 24mm? The world may never know.

You'd have to fall of the mountain to adjust for the 24mm.

Ken seems to be a fan of Nikon only, so I have to sift through what I read there more than I'd like. But when I read something like "This is a great lens. It's so great it makes me want to swap over to Canon from Nikon, because it's better than my favorite Nikon 12 - 24 mm lens." It causes me to pay more attention because of the fanboyish feel. What Ken needs at that site is a linear timeline of the lenses and cameras that he reviews and/or the lenses ranked from best to worst with value taken into account. But that's just me.

 

[Mastamarek]

I would gladly pay $$ to shot his website down. That man irritates me soooo much, and after reading somewhere how much he earns on all of that BS, I seriously wanted to make his life unpleasant by ending it.

 

[joelypolly]

I would gladly pay $$ to shot his website down. That man irritates me soooo much, and after reading somewhere how much he earns on all of that BS, I seriously wanted to make his life unpleasant by ending it.

I suggest a session in anger management.

 

[pdxflint]

What's with all the hating going on?? If you don't like a site, fine. But you guys act as if the guy left your sister at the alter. Maybe some of you should ask yourself what's really bothering you... some of it smacks of jealousy. So the guy's got a quirky, opinionated website? Big freakin' deal! Get over it! And without the implied death threats, thanks.

 

[Doylem]

What's with all the hating going on?? If you don't like a site, fine. But you guys act as if the guy left your sister at the alter. Maybe some of you should ask yourself what's really bothering you... some of it smacks of jealousy. So the guy's got a quirky, opinionated website? Big freakin' deal! Get over it! And without the implied death threats, thanks.

Precisely... He's just a guy who made a website; if you don't like it/him... don't go there. Simple as that...

When I went digital (knowing absolutely nothing about what to buy), I remember reading Rockwell's reviews. When I bought my Nikon D200, I stuck with the 18-70mm 'kit' lens, because KR gave it such a good write-up. And you know what... it's a terrific lens. Three years on, I use little else. So I'm grateful to him for helping me make a good decision.

I don't care whether this lens is faster than that lens, or whether camera A has more 'features' than camera B... because I'm too busy taking pictures. On the rare occasions that I'm in the market for new gear, I'll consult KR again...

 

[Hmac]

I know Ken Rockwell. I can tell you for a fact that he doesn't CARE if anyone thinks he's an idiot....as long as you click on the links on his website. And let me tell you, for every "Ken Rockwell is an idiot" thread that appears on these various discussion boards, Ken makes a bundle.

 

[dimme]

Well I just have to weight in. I like Ken's site, but like everything on the internet it is a opinion. Keep up the good work Ken!

 

[Abraxsis]

I dont think he is an idiot, and feel the need to call him that might be a tad childish, maybe even approaching jealousy. The man makes enough money from his website and endorsements to afford gear the most of us would kill for. Is he as technical as he should be when reviewing VERY good gear, or even using in the proper manner? Not usually. However, he is, like most people on the internet, a staunch opinionist, which he is entitled to be. I say if you don't like the man don't visit his site and if you do don't whine about it. Last time I checked the man didn't have a gaggle of witches in the basement mesmerizing you into reading it .... or does he?

 

[stagi]

What's with all the hating going on?? If you don't like a site, fine. But you guys act as if the guy left your sister at the alter. Maybe some of you should ask yourself what's really bothering you... some of it smacks of jealousy. So the guy's got a quirky, opinionated website? Big freakin' deal! Get over it! And without the implied death threats, thanks.

Totally agree and by hating on him with such passion you do what he probably wants you to, drive people to his site. I have actually never heard of him before this article and it got me to check his site out.

 

[macuserx86]

I have no idea why so many people read me. It must have something to do with being bored at work.

I wasn't invited to Solms because Leica hates me because I tell it like it is. Just read my reviews of the SUMMARIT-M, for instance. They probably think differently, now they their site links to my M9 example photos. Maybe next release.

Have fun!
Ken

This is either the real Ken, or an impostor; either way, this poster is an epic troll.

 

[simore]

wanting too much....

ok, i think there is a problem of wants placed on him here: People are asking too much of the guy, in the sense that they want him to offer absolute truths on a subject that is essentially an art, with no absolutes or fixed boundaries of good and bad. Also, people seem to want their photography advice from a slick, stud-muffin, god-like PR machine: someone on here mentioned his website sucked: hes not marketing himself as a web designer, so who cares? Others have criticised him for suggesting a prime lens over two mid range zooms - when its clear to see that ken's focus was on someone being able to actually get out and take pictures instead of being weighed down by kilos and kilos of lenses.

This is not to say that i completely agree with what he says, or that i dont take issues with some of his opinions, but for me personally, I like two things about his website:

1) he strips photography of the bulls*(t and over emphesis on technical penis measuring that goes on: he encourages you to go out and shoot, instead of sitting at home waiting until you've got £10k to buy a pro setup. Hence the emphasis on the D40 and lower priced cameras. It was partly his website that made me reconsider SLR photography and buy a beat up second hand D40 and take some of the best pictures of my life and really come to enjoy photography again, without caring about all of the numbers, measurements and latest features other websites emphesise over the actual activity of taking pictures. I now regularly have photos carried in magazines and have great fun with my photography.

2) he's an unrepentent nerd and is not scared to be uncool: he wont flatter anyone's ego, or make photography look like a sexy, mysterious activity that is only accessible to the ultra talented and uber-cool few who can afford to take reems and reems of black and white photos of dead pigeons in Berlin or crack prostitutes in Rio. For some people, the fact that a middle aged, white, geeky american who shops at cosco can actually create good quality art and advise others on such matters is deeply troubling.

But i suppose like anyone who goes against the grain of a certain field and still succeeds he will polarise opinion. although in some ways completely different, the example of someone like Denis Rodman springs to mind. But as long as this polarisation is the product of a Hoya HD filter and an expensive designer prime lens, thats just fine with me ;-)

 

[smiddlehurst]

Okay, view from a relative newcomer to the world of DSLR's coming up here.

I got a D40 a couple of years ago and have been slowly learning, mostly through trial and error, how to take good photographs. Actually, wait, make that learning how to take photographs I like, that's more accurate. I finally made the decision this week that this is something I want to pursue and pulled the trigger on a D90 purchase.

I came across Ken's site about a year ago and have found it to be a tremendous help with my own progress. Partially for his equipment reviews but mostly because as you read through the stuff he's done on using equipment you can see WHY he makes certain choices in what he does. I don't always agree with his choices (I personally think he over-saturates a lot of his shots as I tend to prefer a more natural colour palate) but I can almost always see why he's made them and that gets me thinking about how I use my own camera and what I want to see in my pictures.

The reviews I find to be a very good counterpoint to the technical reviews found elsewhere. I tend to treat his site as more of a blog than anything else and when you consider his reviews as opinion-pieces they're very useful. The example someone gave up-thread of the placement of the front wheel on a Canon DSLR is a good one - this isn't something that'll affect everyone but it's something that's definately worth checking out before making a purchase. Would I treat his reviews as a sole source of gospel truth? Nope, but then again anyone who does that with ANY single source is an idiot anyway. Do I think they add useful depth to a wider pool of information on a product? Yes, absolutely.

Basically, as with all 'reviews' on the internet, read multiple sources, apply your own intelligence to what you find and make a decision based on that information. Simple.

 

[simore]

D90

Okay, view from a relative newcomer to the world of DSLR's coming up here.

I got a D40 a couple of years ago and have been slowly learning, mostly through trial and error, how to take good photographs. Actually, wait, make that learning how to take photographs I like, that's more accurate. I finally made the decision this week that this is something I want to pursue and pulled the trigger on a D90 purchase.

I came across Ken's site about a year ago and have found it to be a tremendous help with my own progress. Partially for his equipment reviews but mostly because as you read through the stuff he's done on using equipment you can see WHY he makes certain choices in what he does. I don't always agree with his choices (I personally think he over-saturates a lot of his shots as I tend to prefer a more natural colour palate) but I can almost always see why he's made them and that gets me thinking about how I use my own camera and what I want to see in my pictures.

The reviews I find to be a very good counterpoint to the technical reviews found elsewhere. I tend to treat his site as more of a blog than anything else and when you consider his reviews as opinion-pieces they're very useful. The example someone gave up-thread of the placement of the front wheel on a Canon DSLR is a good one - this isn't something that'll affect everyone but it's something that's definately worth checking out before making a purchase. Would I treat his reviews as a sole source of gospel truth? Nope, but then again anyone who does that with ANY single source is an idiot anyway. Do I think they add useful depth to a wider pool of information on a product? Yes, absolutely.

Basically, as with all 'reviews' on the internet, read multiple sources, apply your own intelligence to what you find and make a decision based on that information. Simple.

I also took the D40 - D90 route when i got a bit more serious about my photography and its a great camera, the additional features have really enabled me to do some amazing things far beyond my wildest dreams. I think you've bought up something important here - as with anything in life its best to consult a few sources of info.

 

[pcypert]

I know this will sound snobby but anyone who knows even a tad about photography knows his true reputation for reviewing products he's never held, etc. I do feel bad that so many people take his "advice"... one of the perils of the internet... he was early on with his voice and established a foothold... hopefully they don't just stop there and also hit true, working photographer sites and forums and get real info not interpreted from press releases...

Paul

PS- i think whoever posted as KR was funny.

 

[walnuts]

You're conflating two really different subjects. Photography as an art and its "rules" has little to do with Ken Rockwell and his equipment reviews. He's a gear guy, and as far as I know, he doesn't spend a lot of time dispensing opinions on artistic matters.

That's not true- that's one of my favorite things about his site (others here have mentioned this too). He drives home the point constantly that things like composition are far more important than the technical qualities like sharpness. I think his "Its not your camera" article link is plastered at the top of almost every review. That's good stuff for a beginner (myself included) to see and understand. He has several (albeit simple) articles on artistic points like color, composition and has links to good books for further reading.

 

[Phrasikleia]

That's not true- that's one of my favorite things about his site (others here have mentioned this too). He drives home the point constantly that things like composition are far more important than the technical qualities like sharpness. I think his "Its not your camera" article link is plastered at the top of almost every review. That's good stuff for a beginner (myself included) to see and understand. He has several (albeit simple) articles on artistic points like color, composition and has links to good books for further reading.

OK, fair enough. I can't claim to have read very deeply on his site, since I usually bristle whenever I do read something he has written. If I got a sense that he was a genuinely thoughtful, informed, and helpful person, I would read him and recommend him; but he is in my estimation quite callous and antagonistic. I realize that his occasionally arrogant and abrasive manner is meant to be provocative enough to ensure lots of chatter that will bring traffic to his site--it is therefore entertaining to people of a certain ilk and (worse still) influential to others. I just don't care for that approach, so I really have nothing nice to say about him.

 

[Acsom]

I know this will sound snobby but anyone who knows even a tad about photography knows his true reputation for reviewing products he's never held, etc. I do feel bad that so many people take his "advice"... one of the perils of the internet... he was early on with his voice and established a foothold... hopefully they don't just stop there and also hit true, working photographer sites and forums and get real info not interpreted from press releases...

Paul

You have to agree, though, his recommendation of the D40 is a great one. That is a really wonderful, simple entry level DSLR that takes great shots. It was great for Nikon, and great for the photographers who took the advice, the fact that it worked out great for KR is irrelevant.

 

[pcypert]

But I've seen him passionately recommend other cameras too before anyone has actually handled them only to retract if others later find faults. The fact that he once hit something right doesn't mean he isn't just standing at the plate swinging wildly most of the time...

I respect the guy for saying what he wants to say and staying with it... I just wish there was more of a warning for those who are passing by expecting unbiased reviews or tips from a respected source...