Ken Rockwell is an idiot: Your camera DOES matter.

[tirediron]

Then I should've been more specific. I optimized the point and shoot's settings for the occasion, just not the shutter speed and aperture. The LCD was very dim, and I didn't quite hit the exposure on the head. The point of this whole thread was to raise an eyebrow or two to the credibility of Ken's test.

Don't mean to burst your bubble dude, but that ship sailed a long time ago!

 

[Garbz]

I'm not debating artistic value, I'm debating image quality.
Both were on manual, both at 1/1000, F3.1 or 3.3.

Yeah? Because there's clearly more than 1 stop difference between both frames.

Minute differences in the exposure and framing do not invalidate my point. The differences are obvious.

Yeah the differences are obvious. The differences are not minute.

Please if you're going to test the validity of something then do it more scientifically. Identical frames, identical exposures, tripod.

I may as well say my mum's 5 year old Mitsubishi is better than a Ferrari if the Ferrari's gearbox is jammed and there's a 3 year old kid behind the wheel.

 

[Dwig]

...
Both were on manual, both at 1/1000, F3.1 or 3.3.

But what ISO was used on each, duh!

One reports a Gain of 0 and one reports a Gain of 2. Also ISO calibration between differnent models and brands are not exact matches. Neither are the various sharpness, contrast, and saturation controls in any two different RAW converters, either those in the camera or those on an external computer.

The OP's comparison images are useless for a critique or response to Ken Rockwall's editorial.

 

[JerryPH]

In this "discussion", more than anything else, the level of challenge or difficulty we place on the camera will let the camera show "it's stuff". If I am taking a picture of a pool or backyard in bright lighting conditions and I have a (let me use 2 cameras I own and am intimately familiar with for the sake of discussion) Nikon E8800 and a Nikon D700, I can make the 2 pictures near identical. The conditions are so favorable, that someone with an etch-a-sketch could manage quite nicely!

Now, let's all go to an evening concert and start shooting... I think the answer is obvious. Shooting conditions are now difficult and challenging. Camera limitations are being hit or surpassed and the camera with superior specifications will get the superior results.

Equipment *does* matter, unless you are shooting scenes that do not challenge the capabilities of either the camera and/or the photographer. The photographer plays a large role in the sense that a knowledgeable photographer will be able to pull better results out of any given camera than someone that just sets it to "auto" and lets the camera make all decisions for them, but even the best photographer in the world would not be able to give you one decent shot in a truly challenging condition using a low quality camera.

A little common sense in this debate goes a long way to debunking the rantings of the very misleading Ken Rockwell and his weak sense of humor.

 

[Iron Flatline]

I like the second one better.

 

[TamiyaGuy]

I do see what you mean, although I can understand what Ken means as well. I suppose what Ken Rockwell meant to say was that the camera doesn't matter as much as people make it out to be; that lens choice and (much more importantly) experience make you a better photographer.

I suppose it's a bit like icing on a cake. If you take an awesome photo with a bad camera, it's like making a great cake with paraffin-flavoured icing. Sometimes you can scrape the icing off and it'll still taste nice, but sometimes it's buggered it up. A decent camera is the thing that tops it all off.

 

[TUX424]

They are exposing for two different things each camera is
D70s: Is Exposing for the sky so it underexposes the walkway by the pool
P&S: Is Exposing for the walkway so the sky in blown out
They need to be exposing for the same thing to make this test at all accurate

 

[dcclark]

I do see what you mean, although I can understand what Ken means as well. I suppose what Ken Rockwell meant to say was that the camera doesn't matter as much as people make it out to be; that lens choice and (much more importantly) experience make you a better photographer.

I suppose it's a bit like icing on a cake. If you take an awesome photo with a bad camera, it's like making a great cake with paraffin-flavoured icing. Sometimes you can scrape the icing off and it'll still taste nice, but sometimes it's buggered it up. A decent camera is the thing that tops it all off.

Exactly -- nobody's saying that all cameras are exactly equivalent, because that would be quite silly. Sometimes there are things you simply cannot do with a P&S -- the OP's flickr stream has some good examples of that, too.

But in general, the idea is that the photographer is the major factor in how good a photo looks -- not his equipment.

I'm always amazed at the hostility that shows up with this topic... are people really so wedded to their equipment that they are unwilling to accept that it's not the whole story?

 

[gsgary]

Did you spot meter with the point and shoot ?, thats the problem you spot metered with the Nikon so user error

 

[Joves]

Don't mean to burst your bubble dude, but that ship sailed a long time ago!

Actually I believe the ship came back from an around the world trip. Now it is going out again.

 

[rufus5150]

Is it this time of the month again?

Cramps, chocolate and Ken Rockwell discussions: they're almost like clockwork.

 

[manaheim]

Ken Rockwell Facts

Contributed by liem, Epic|, Fufie, michel_v, neom, Wintre, Bas|k, lament, mattsteg__ and pal.

• Ken Rockwell is the Chuck Norris of photography
• Ken Rockwell's camera has similar settings to ours, except his are: P[erfect] Av[Awesome Priority Tv[Totally Awesome Priority] M[ajestic]
• Ken Rockwell doesn't color correct. He adjusts your world to match his.
• Sure, Ken Rockwell deletes a bad photo or two. Other people call these Pulitzers.
• Ken Rockwell doesn't adjust his DOF, he changes space-time.
• Circle of confusion? You might be confused. Ken Rockwell never is.
• Ken Rockwell doesn't wait for the light when he shoots a landscape - the light waits for him.
• Ken Rockwell never flips his camera in portrait position, he flips the earth
• Ken Rockwell ordered an L-lens from Nikon, and got one.
• Ken Rockwell is the only person to have photographed Jesus; unfortunately he ran out of film and had to use a piece of cloth instead.
• When Ken Rockwell brackets a shot, the three versions of the photo win first place in three different categories
• Before Nikon or Canon releases a camera they go to Ken and they ask him to test them, the best cameras get a Nikon sticker and the less good get a Canon sticker
• Once Ken tested a camera, he said I cant even put Canon on this one,thats how Pentax was born
• Rockwellian policy isn't doublethink - Ken doesn't even need to think once
• Ken Rockwell doesn't use flash ever since the Nagasaki incident.
• Only Ken Rockwell can take pictures of Ken Rockwell; everyone else would just get their film overexposed by the light of his genius
• Ken Rockwell wanted something to distract the lesser photographers, and lo, there were ducks.
• Ken Rockwell is the only one who can take self-portraits of you
• Ken Rockwell's nudes were fully clothed at the time of exposure
• Ken Rockwell once designed a zoom lens. You know it as the Hubble SpaceTelescope.
• When Ken unpacks his CF card, it already has masterpieces on it.
• Rockwell portraits are so lifelike, they have to pay taxes
• On Ken Rockwell's desktop, the Trash Icon is really a link to National Geographic Magazine
• Ken Rockwell spells point-and-shoot "h-a-s-s-e-l-b-l-a-d"
• When Ken Rockwell went digital, National Geographic nearly went out of business because he was no longer phyically discarding photos
• For every 10 shots that Ken Rockwell takes, 11 are keepers.
• Ken Rockwell's digital files consist of 0's, 1's AND 2's.
• Ken Rockwell never focus, everything moves into his DoF
• Ken Rockwell's shots are so perfect, Adobe redesigned photoshop for him: all it consists of is a close button.
• The term tripod was coined after his silhouette
• Ken Rockwell never produces awful work, only work too advanced for the viewer
• A certain braind of hig-end cameras was named after people noticed the quality was a lot "like a" rockwell
• Ken Rockwell isn't the Chuck Norris of photography; Chuck Norris is the Ken Rockwell of martial arts.
• Ken Rockwell never starts, he continues

 

[kundalini]

^^ You forgot one there, Chris. Much like the Queen, he doesn't come..... he arrives.

(spelling exhibited for the masses)

 

[manaheim]

hahah

 

[Marc Kurth]

Is it this time of the month again?
Cramps, chocolate and Ken Rockwell discussions: they're almost like clockwork.

And all of the inherent grumpiness that seems to go with it