Ken Rockwell

[Chica]

Hi everyone,

At the risk of starting an online war... just wondering.... I have noticed a few people refer to Ken Rockwell in a kind of negative way and was wondering what people on this forum (who know far more about cameras than I do!) think of his website / opinions / tutorials / buying advice etc. I have read his website and often wonder if he knows what he is talking about (he seems to?) or not.

Cheers

Cathy

[devilla101]

Well when I first started reading up on digital cameras Ken Rockwell offered a lot of what I thought was useful information.
After reading his article on D200 and the 18-200VR I was almost convinced to get one. I mean who wouldn't want an all round lens that negates the use of a tripod (He's pics were awesome) but alas after venturing more into photography and getting great advice from the members on this forum, you kinda look back and re-read Ken's Rockwells crap and realised...hmmmm.. Now I know why there is negative opinion of him

Cathy if you need advice/opinion on things, It pays to ask here instead and listen to more than one voice. That way you can make a much more informed decision

[gstark]

Cathy if you need advice/opinion on things, It pays to ask here instead and listen to more than one voice. That way you can make a much more informed decision

And taking Ron's suggestion a bit further, that "more than one voice" concept equally applies beyond this forum. Gather as much independent advice as you can, try to ascertain the credibility of the source of that advice, double check if you wish, and then procrastinate.

Sorry ... make your decision.

[aim54x]

I find Ken Rockwell to be useful, great info, but CARE MUST be taken when you do read what he writes. As you learn more about photography you will find flaws in his arguments. As the guys above have noted, keep an ear to other opinions. If you are a Nikon user try reading Thom Hogan as well (bythom.com).

[chrisk]

ken is what he is. a bloke making money from posting his opinions. some agree with him, some don't. personally, i think the guy is a moron.

http://www.bahneman.com/liem/blog/article.php?story=Ken_Rockwell_Facts

Ken Rockwell Facts

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

[DaveB]

Only Ken Rockwell can take pictures of Ken Rockwell; everyone else would just get their film overexposed by the light of his genius

My first reaction to this was to wonder if it explained (or could explain) the overexposed photo of Ken and his family on the front page of his site!

Ken occasionally raises valid points about equipment, but he doesn't spout gospel. Every couple of months I swing by his site for a laugh: sometimes I wonder how tongue-in-cheek his writing is, but mostly I don't bother.

[darklightphotography]

ken is what he is. a bloke making money from posting his opinions. some agree with him, some don't. personally, i think the guy is a moron.

I think he's a genius myself, as he makes money writing stuff that no-one takes seriously, and so doesn't need research, considered opinions or even the truth to earn him a living.


From http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm - "The only thing I do guarantee is that there is plenty of stuff I simply make up out of thin air"