Ken Rockwell

[OGsPhotography]

Rockwell and Northrup plus Kelby completes the Trinity.

FRO KNOWS PHOTO, ftw ( for the win).

 

[Ysarex]

Rockwell and Northrup plus Kelby completes the Trinity.

FRO KNOWS PHOTO, ftw ( for the win).

No, not Fro. He's another (frequent) purveyor of bad info.

Joe

 

[astroNikon]

Rockwell and Northrup plus Kelby completes the Trinity.

FRO KNOWS PHOTO, ftw ( for the win).

View attachment 125149 No, not Fro. He's another (frequent) purveyor of bad info.

Joe

his two sidekicks are worse.

 

[Designer]

We need a Chelsea channel.

 

[chuasam]

I often don't agree with his conclusions or recommendations, but I do use his 'site frequently when I want to check the specs on a lens or need other hard data.

That's the only thing his site is good for.
Weight of camera, filter size, and specs.
His subjective viewpoints are ridiculous.
They're like Chuck Norris riding a TRex.

 

[chuasam]

Rockwell and Northrup plus Kelby completes the Trinity.

FRO KNOWS PHOTO, ftw ( for the win).

View attachment 125149 No, not Fro. He's another (frequent) purveyor of bad info.

Joe

his two sidekicks are worse.

Ken Rockwell or Chuck Norris...
because Chuck Norris can sidekick a colour photo and it turns Black and Blue.

 

[nerwin]

"Someone shooting with a DSLR on a tripod in daylight probably has a few screws loose. VR further eliminates the need for tripods. If I shoot a 15-pound 400mm lens, I use a monopod; not to steady it, but just to hold the weight." - Ken Rockwell

Probably one of my favorite things he had said.

 

[Solarflare]

Why ? I wouldnt disagree with him about this, though he could have been a bit more precise, or a bit more vague, whatever you prefer - something like:

There is no need for a tripod just to attain "perfect sharpness" in normal shooting situations.

Even in daylight however there are tricks like 10 stop ND filters or HDR that will require a tripod.

 

[BananaRepublic]

Apparently it has almost turned into a sport to make fun of Rockwell.

But personally I dont have much to complain about him. He offered a nice intro into photography. Because of him I became interested in DSLRs, and prime lenses, and photographic technique. His site isnt so bad if you want to learn photography.

Because of him, I got a D5100, 18-55mm, 55-200mm, and 35mm. A great starter kit to try out photography - cheap, lightweight, and able to deliver good results if used properly.

The only bad advice he ever gave me was the SB400 flash. A most useless thing. Whatever you do, you really should get a flash you can rotate around and put off the camera.

I guess I just dont have an issue reading someones opinion and forming my own, instead of following any advice to the letter, like some sort of slave ?

For example I didnt buy his advice to photograph only to JPEG because I figured he was just wired to "make it right in camera" from his film days. But a camera records 14 bits of data per pixel and a JPEG only stores 8, so thats obviously a huge loss.

Ugh this Rockwell guy again, enough.

 

[nerwin]

Why ? I wouldnt disagree with him about this, though he could have been a bit more precise, or a bit more vague, whatever you prefer - something like:

There is no need for a tripod just to attain "perfect sharpness" in normal shooting situations.

Even in daylight however there are tricks like 10 stop ND filters or HDR that will require a tripod.

Its just the way he says it that I disagree with.

If I'm shooting a long exposure during the day or doing a time lapse which would require a tripod, that makes me have a few screws loose?

 

[snowbear]

IMO, lot's of grain-of-salt / tongue-in-cheek when I go to his site. My favorite quote is in the "About" page:

I have the energy and sense of humor of a three-year old, so remember, this is a personal website, and never presented as fact. I enjoy making things up for fun, as does The Onion, and I publish them here — even on this page.

 

[Overread]

See that's a big difference - Ken is totally honest that some of his statements are totally nuts and just there for attention whilst others are purely opinion. He's not brandishing himself as anything other than what he is. Good for google and gets him views; he might not be the best and most informed or most impartial source but he's honest about it. Much in the same way something like Digital Rev is honestly silly in some of their videos.