TPF Opinions on Ken Rockwell

[Don]

So, what are folks opinions of Ken Rockwell and his photography tips? I've been reading around his site some, and I've seen some other folks who write about photography, and he seems to be a little controversial. What are your all's thoughts?

[Ads]

[Scatterbrained]

The problem with Ken is that he will have some good points mixed in with BS. If you don't know better you could end up believing the BS.
If you want to have fun you should head over to a Canon forum and ask this question.

[usayit]

Mostly B.S. with truth sprinkled.. But hey.. if he supports his family with the site, more power to him.

[LCARSx32]

The general feeling I get when people here talk about him is "moron". *EDIT* I'd like to point out that I've never been to his site, so I don't know. That's just what I get from what others have said when someone mentions they've read something on his site.

[Petraio Prime]

The general feeling I get when people here talk about him is "moron". *EDIT* I'd like to point out that I've never been to his site, so I don't know. That's just what I get from what others have said when someone mentions they've read something on his site.

Seconded loudly, but from time to time he does actually produce something useful. He doesn't comprehend much (especially about optics in particular), but he is good at gathering information. His opinions are basically superficial at best to worthless at worst. The problem is he doesn't comprehend anything beyond a very superficial level. He's like a parrot that can repeat what it hears but doesn't grasp anything at all.

[Scatterbrained]

The general feeling I get when people here talk about him is "moron". *EDIT* I'd like to point out that I've never been to his site, so I don't know. That's just what I get from what others have said when someone mentions they've read something on his site.

You should go, it can be fun.

[Village Idiot]

Ken Rockwell is a joke.

/thread

[shaunly]

you just opened up a whole can of worm. Some people are very sensitive about this topic. I personally couldn't care less about what he thinks. It's just like reading another person opinion on the forum.

[Sw1tchFX]

He's said things that hit the nail square on the head, but he's also said some things that i disagree with, like his stance on RAW and JPEG.

The majority of people who read his site are in photography for family snapshots, which he recognizes as his target audience, which his advise is generally sound (again, for that audience).

I think that alot of people who say he's a joke don't understand who KR is trying to appeal to. Joke's on them because KR is laughing his way all the way to the bank.

[bentcountershaft]

He's fine to read if you can tell when he's joking but his columns can make life hard on beginners.

[ann]

it is hard to take him seriously when he reviews equipment he even says he has never used.
\

[Village Idiot]

He's said things that hit the nail square on the head, but he's also said some things that i disagree with, like his stance on RAW and JPEG.

The majority of people who read his site are in photography for family snapshots, which he recognizes as his target audience, which his advise is generally sound (again, for that audience).

I think that alot of people who say he's a joke don't understand who KR is trying to appeal to. Joke's on them because KR is laughing his way all the way to the bank.

Comparing a 5D MKII to a 3Ds is not something that's directed towards people wanting to take snapshots of their kids.

He took the 5D MKII image and blew it up to 24mp to compare it to the native 24mp image from the 3Ds and complained that the IQ sucked and the 5D MKII image was blurry. No ****, he enlarged it past it's 21mp native size.

He also had the stance that FF cameras were useless and a dying segment in the market and APS-C was the wave of the future. He changed his tone after Nikon released the D700.

[Derrel]

He has some good articles and some great points, as well as some throwaway articles and some facile points. He's hard to get a read on sometimes, especially when he's trying to be funny, or flippant. Much of his stuff, like his lens reviews and hands-on comparisons of various pieces of kit, are, for the most part, pretty good. His target audience finds him very helpful, while people who have different opinions often find him rather,well, grating.
He gets 50/50 reviews it seems. YMMV. Caveat emptor. All the usual disclaimers apply. Not available in all states. Actual product may be different than illustration. Must be 18 or over.

[fokker]

He's said things that hit the nail square on the head, but he's also said some things that i disagree with, like his stance on RAW and JPEG.

The majority of people who read his site are in photography for family snapshots, which he recognizes as his target audience, which his advise is generally sound (again, for that audience).

I think that alot of people who say he's a joke don't understand who KR is trying to appeal to. Joke's on them because KR is laughing his way all the way to the bank.

Comparing a 5D MKII to a 3Ds is not something that's directed towards people wanting to take snapshots of their kids.

He took the 5D MKII image and blew it up to 24mp to compare it to the native 24mp image from the 3Ds and complained that the IQ sucked and the 5D MKII image was blurry. No ****, he enlarged it past it's 21mp native size.

He also had the stance that FF cameras were useless and a dying segment in the market and APS-C was the wave of the future. He changed his tone after Nikon released the D700.

3Ds?

[LCARSx32]

He's said things that hit the nail square on the head, but he's also said some things that i disagree with, like his stance on RAW and JPEG.

I have been to his site!! He's the reason I shot in JPG until a month or so ago! I've decided I don't like his site. He needs to put disclaimers saying this doesn't apply to people wanting to get into serious photography. I had no idea how much control shooting in RAW gave you. Unfortunately, his site is the first one that comes up in google.