Save me from Ken Rockwell's advice

[Whootsinator]

Holy crap you're clueless! Alright, that's not a necessarily a bad thing at this point... We've all been clueless at one time or another.

Go here:

Exposure Lessons, in order Stop Shooting Auto!

Read all of those very simple, very short, and very easy to understand lessons. When you're done, read them again. Finally, read them a third time. After that, just have fun with it. Practice practice practice.

 

[Mike_E]

OK, let's start from scratch.

What do you want to shoot (in order of desires) and how much do you want to spend.

Are you willing to buy used equipment to fill out your kit quicker or do you want to only buy new.

Do you have a brand preference or are you willing to to go with whichever more closely suits your needs.

Have you been to this site and read it's tutorials.. Digital Photography Tutorials

Does your ego require the latest and greatest or can you relax and save for the best in glass.

Let us know the answers to these and we'll steer you in the right direction.

 

[pgriz]

I am a beginner.

I've been a beginner for almost five decades.

Every year, I've learned new stuff. Every year, that newly-aquired knowledge just showed me how ignorant I was, and still am. But there is progress, of sorts. Every year, my knowledge of my ignorance grows. Getting knowledge and experience is a little like climbing out of a hole and up a mountain. At the beginning, the whole known world is what you see around you - heck, you can almost touch the sides. Then you get out of the hole (acquire that first little bit of knowledge), and suddenly the horizon recedes and there's a lot more territory to explore. As you start working up that mountain, the horizon recedes even more... Damn, the world's becoming a pretty big place.

It's a good journey. Just remember to learn the fundamentals. You don't need fancy gear to learn about composition, lighting, posing. Sure, good gear, like good tools, help you get to the objective, but good gear cannot compensate for lack of knowledge, judgement, and skill.

Previous posters have given good advice. Figure out what you want to do, then acquire the gear you need. If you are truly a beginner, then start with a good point-and-shoot, and go and shoot lots and lots. Then see what you seem to be photographing the most - that's probably where you want to spend more effort on. If you find yourself frustrated because the shots you want to take just can't be captured by your equipment, then excellent - you've learned some thing useful to guide your purchases.

Probably even more important than gear, is joining a local photo club, hanging around photographers (the good ones), and finding yourself a mentor who can guide you. Learning from the experience of others is one of the best ways to get better. Forums like this one are good, but hands-on advice is much faster.

May your journey be fun, engaging, and educational.

 

[necoo]

Low light photography: This just refers to the moments when you need to pull out a tripod. The term can be used for anything like a typical indoor house at night, to night time photo such as the city you just linked to, to star photography. The first is trivial to learn, the second a bit of a beyond the basics type thing, however taking photos of stars through satellites is a very advanced topic and would by easily considered throwing yourself in the very deep end.

 

[flea77]

Both this site and Ken Rockwell's have great information. Everyone will disagree with someone so I would not worry about that much. I have seen arguments like "the sky is blue" and "no, the sky is not blue, what you see is the scattering of blue light due to the absorption of other wavelengths", then "no, the sky is blue, look!" and on, and on, and on. Ken gives some great advice, and some not so great advice, just like everyone else on the planet. I have to admit, I do enjoy his sense of humor though.

Allan

 

[inTempus]

Both this site and Ken Rockwell's have great information. Everyone will disagree with someone so I would not worry about that much. I have seen arguments like "the sky is blue" and "no, the sky is not blue, what you see is the scattering of blue light due to the absorption of other wavelengths", then "no, the sky is blue, look!" and on, and on, and on. Ken gives some great advice, and some not so great advice, just like everyone else on the planet. I have to admit, I do enjoy his sense of humor though.

Allan

Ken is a talentless hack that thinks his "reviews" of items he's never actually held are funny. He's not funny, his site is a joke and I would never buy anything based on his review.

 

[flea77]

Ken is a talentless hack that thinks his "reviews" of items he's never actually held are funny. He's not funny, his site is a joke and I would never buy anything based on his review.

And as I was saying, others may say the same thing of you. Everyone has their opinions, no one is ever 100% correct. I personally think there is some great info on his site (others disagree), but I have found a wealth of factual information there that has really helped (factual, such as lens specs, variations, features, etc).

Allan

 

[Josh66]

I would never buy anything based on his review.

Neither would I, but I do think his site is funny...

 

[Derrel]

Ken is a talentless hack that thinks his "reviews" of items he's never actually held are funny. He's not funny, his site is a joke and I would never buy anything based on his review.

He has only 40 years' worth of experience in photography too, so add "newbie" to the list. It's fun to bash people, isn't it!

He does have some good insights on equipment, and price-value propositions, and "alternative equipment options". He's one of many voices on the internet, but his site does have a disclaimer. The thing is, many newbies are not adequately well-versed in the basics or in the equipment types he reviews to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, the humor from the truth, etc,etc. He has some interesting perspectives, and he's mostly a Nikon and Leica shooter, so a lot of people will be predisposed to hate anything he says with a knee-jerk type of reaction, or from having fallen for one of his many humorous "recommendations" that were intended as a joke.

The easiest way to save yourself is..not to read him.

 

[table1349]

So, I decided to read Ken Rockwell's website for a while. It was the #1 result on Google for photography advice. However, I tend to seek other opinions before making any kind of purchase, so I googled "Ken Rockwell is a dumbass" and "Ken Rockwell is an idiot," the later which brought up this site.

A lot of people seem to disagree with him.

For a total newbie just starting out (I've been into the... point and shoot... scene... oh dear), what kind of camera is recommended? I'd love to take beautiful, clear pictures such as this:

File:Hong Kong Skyline Restitch - Dec 2007.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

I don't understand the whole "lens" thingmabob, and I don't know what kind of DSLR I need. Any help would be greatly appreciated. :mrgreen: However, I don't want advice for Point & Shoot cameras. Right now, I am only interested in DSLR's due to what I've read everywhere.

EDIT: Oh yeah, one more thing. I've been looking at this: Newegg.com - Canon EOS Rebel T1i Black 15.10 MP 3.0" 920K LCD Full HD Movie Digital SLR Camera w/ EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens

Guy goes to the Doctor and complains of arm pain when he raises his right arm. Doctor has him demonstrate and when the guy puts raises his right arm over his head he yelps in pain.

Doctor asks, so it hurts when you do that? Guy says yes. Doctor say, Well don't do that!"

Don't go to Rockwells page and the problem is solved. :lmao:



P.S. Your bill is $40.00. Send it in cash to my office. You have to fill out the insurance paperwork you self or get a congressman to do it for you. I only take cash.

 

[lenz32]

Disclaimer: I haven't read everything he's written.

I did the search because I was sick of hearing "well Ken R says...". Who IS this guy. Well, I finally figured it out, he's the P.T. Barnum of the photo world. He talks the talk, but does he walk the walk? He's not an Adams, a Weston or even a Leibovitz. He doesn't make his living with his camera, he makes it with his mouth. ("I make my living from this web site"). Huh? Why is ANYONE listening to him. Until recently his favorite camera was a Nikon D40 because 'that's all anyone really needs'. Say what? If that's true, why did he switch? I'm the first to say its the photographer not the box, but seriously? You don't build a house with pliers. The right tool for the right job DOES have its place. He skips that. You have to KNOW the rules before knowing when to break them(creatively).

I've seen many here being kind, saying that half of what he says is BS. Yes, VERY kind. One of the more glaring (to me) comments is that he's constantly fiddling with controls, exposure over rides, etc. to "fix" things. That rates a bigger ?HUH? If its not close enough that you can't fix it in post, nothing you do in camera is going to help. If you know the theory behind the Zone System, you'll know what you can get, and how to get it without making a project of it. And I came from the days when it was perfect on film or you just plain got to shoot it again.

Truth: there is a certain amount of luck in photography. You have to be in the right place at the right time. Truth: if you take too long you loose the moment. Truth: Over reworked photos just never look "right". They're like a Britney Spears song, just plain over produced.

Ken R, go get a day job. I'm tired of debunking the BS for people without the background knowledge to understand my explanations and too lazy to learn to know BS when they smell it. That brings me to my purpose, beyond the brute rant. Can we P.L.E.A.S.E get this guy off the top of the search engines? Pretty please?

 

[o hey tyler]

Yeah, I read it. However, most people aren't going to read that horrific wall of text.

So they won't read the horrific wall of text that includes a disclaimer (right at the beginning), but will read several reviews on cameras?

Sounds like a personal problem to me.

 

[o hey tyler]

Disclaimer: I haven't read everything he's written.

I did the search because I was sick of hearing "well Ken R says...". Who IS this guy. Well, I finally figured it out, he's the P.T. Barnum of the photo world. He talks the talk, but does he walk the walk? He's not an Adams, a Weston or even a Leibovitz. He doesn't make his living with his camera, he makes it with his mouth. ("I make my living from this web site"). Huh? Why is ANYONE listening to him. Until recently his favorite camera was a Nikon D40 because 'that's all anyone really needs'. Say what? If that's true, why did he switch? I'm the first to say its the photographer not the box, but seriously? You don't build a house with pliers. The right tool for the right job DOES have its place. He skips that. You have to KNOW the rules before knowing when to break them(creatively).

I've seen many here being kind, saying that half of what he says is BS. Yes, VERY kind. One of the more glaring (to me) comments is that he's constantly fiddling with controls, exposure over rides, etc. to "fix" things. That rates a bigger ?HUH? If its not close enough that you can't fix it in post, nothing you do in camera is going to help. If you know the theory behind the Zone System, you'll know what you can get, and how to get it without making a project of it. And I came from the days when it was perfect on film or you just plain got to shoot it again.

Truth: there is a certain amount of luck in photography. You have to be in the right place at the right time. Truth: if you take too long you loose the moment. Truth: Over reworked photos just never look "right". They're like a Britney Spears song, just plain over produced.

Ken R, go get a day job. I'm tired of debunking the BS for people without the background knowledge to understand my explanations and too lazy to learn to know BS when they smell it. That brings me to my purpose, beyond the brute rant. Can we P.L.E.A.S.E get this guy off the top of the search engines? Pretty please?

You're tired of debunking Ken Rockwell after one whole post? Maybe forums aren't the place for you...

I know he's an idiot. But really...

 

[Joshonator]

Here's some advice. It's easy to get caught up in fancy camera features when buying your first SLR. So set a budget on how much you are willing to spend in total, then spend 1/3 of that on the camera body and 2/3 on lenses (less than 1/3 on the camera body is also fine).

The problem with ken (in my opinion) is that he states his point of view in a very matter-of-fact way on topics that are clearly debatable.

 

[molested_cow]

I don't understand why people have problems with other's "opinions". I mean, it's freaking opinions!

I go to Ken Rockwell's website quite often to find out lens comparisons. I go there when I know exactly which lens I want to find out more about. I read the comparison feedbacks and the test photos. These is not information that I can find out conveniently by myself. I can also go to other people's websites to find out the same information. Ultimately, all of these websites are based on personal opinions. It's like when I shop in Amazon.com, I will read user feedbacks before making my choice. It's all subjective, and it's up to your wisdom to make it objective for yourself.

So Ken Rockwell makes money off the website he put up and you have a problem with it? Hmmm..... ok, what has he done wrong? Has he committed a crime? Did you get tricked into paying to read his opinions? If anything he's being generous for offering his opinion for FREE and hope someone donates him some money. If you really have problem with his website, then make your own and better him! "Talk the talk"? Who's talking?