Why NIKON is King
Posted 01/07/2010 - 11:02
Link
Ha Ha!
I notice there is 'button' at the start, saying 'please help Ken Rockwell' - some indigestion tablets perhaps
Andy
I notice there is 'button' at the start, saying 'please help Ken Rockwell' - some indigestion tablets perhaps
Andy
Andy
Posted 01/07/2010 - 15:23
Link
It shows why the guy is a @#?>head. He does know how to get page hits though, quite how he managed to get to this level of notoriety I don't know though.
What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.
What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 15:42
Link
RR wrote:
It shows why the guy is a @#?>head. He does know how to get page hits though, quite how he managed to get to this level of notoriety I don't know though.
What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.
Like all of his reviews (most of which don't involve actually using the product in question):It shows why the guy is a @#?>head. He does know how to get page hits though, quite how he managed to get to this level of notoriety I don't know though.
What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.
If it's emblazoned with 'Nikon' it's likely to be the best example of that type of product, in the world, ever.
Anything else is just a piece of "garbage" with "garbage features real photographers don't need".
The guy is a complete joke.
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Apparently.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 15:56
Link
The 645D review is a joke, claiming that SD cards are too slow for pro use.
In his own speed test, copying 406MB of data from card to computer, the Extreme IV CF took 11.4s over Firewire, the Extreme III SD card took 15.7s in the SD slot of a MacBook. That means, roughly speaking, if both cards were 4 GB that you would lose 40 seconds by using an SD card.
This is before you consider that the CF cards he uses are Extreme IV and the SD cards Extreme III, like for like would reduce the difference.
The other point he misses is that SD as a medium is still evolving and improving.
In the "review" he also marks it down for having a 77 segment metering matrix (76 too many apparently) and 11 AF points (10 too many), ignoring the fact that these can be configured otherwise (Spot metering, centre AF point). He also doesn't like it because he can't see any dials (though I'm sure actually holding one would remedy this).
In his own speed test, copying 406MB of data from card to computer, the Extreme IV CF took 11.4s over Firewire, the Extreme III SD card took 15.7s in the SD slot of a MacBook. That means, roughly speaking, if both cards were 4 GB that you would lose 40 seconds by using an SD card.
This is before you consider that the CF cards he uses are Extreme IV and the SD cards Extreme III, like for like would reduce the difference.
The other point he misses is that SD as a medium is still evolving and improving.
In the "review" he also marks it down for having a 77 segment metering matrix (76 too many apparently) and 11 AF points (10 too many), ignoring the fact that these can be configured otherwise (Spot metering, centre AF point). He also doesn't like it because he can't see any dials (though I'm sure actually holding one would remedy this).
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Apparently.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 16:08
Link
robbie_d wrote:
If it's emblazoned with 'Nikon' it's likely to be the best example of that type of product, in the world, ever.
Anything else is just a piece of "garbage" with "garbage features real photographers don't need".
The guy is a complete joke.
I think you'll find that Ken is now a Canonite. He praises Canon over Nikon these days. He even mentioned that his friend Karl Grobl was selling Canon equipment but failed to say that it was due to him jumping ship to Nikon.linkRR wrote:
It shows why the guy is a @#?>head. He does know how to get page hits though, quite how he managed to get to this level of notoriety I don't know though.
What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.
Like all of his reviews (most of which don't involve actually using the product in question):It shows why the guy is a @#?>head. He does know how to get page hits though, quite how he managed to get to this level of notoriety I don't know though.
What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.
If it's emblazoned with 'Nikon' it's likely to be the best example of that type of product, in the world, ever.
Anything else is just a piece of "garbage" with "garbage features real photographers don't need".
The guy is a complete joke.
As for him being a complete joke? That's an opinion many in the world would disagree with. He gave up his full time job as he earns enough from his website, not funny some how.
I take Ken as I find him. Some articles are his point of view (entitled) others are very informative (if you use Nikon).
I don't think he produces stunning images or can be classed as a pro photographer due to his source of income, but to slay the guy because he has an opinion or point of view is a bit OTT. IMO.
Regards
Too far from a shore.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 16:20
Link
What's odd is that he gives favourable reviews to older Pentax gear - look at his opinions on the M series lenses and they wouldn't be out of place here.
Matt
Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
Shooting the Welsh Wilderness with K-m, KX, MX, ME Super and assorted lenses.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 16:29
Link
Ken is now commercialised. With that, his raw technical dialogue has suffered. Some years back, I was intrigued with his articles. They were a refreshing change from the stuff I saw in some of the "too many" photographic magazines.
Regards
Regards
Too far from a shore.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 16:40
Link
K10D wrote:
As for him being a complete joke? That's an opinion many in the world would disagree with. He gave up his full time job as he earns enough from his website, not funny some how.
I take Ken as I find him. Some articles are his point of view (entitled) others are very informative (if you use Nikon).
I don't think he produces stunning images or can be classed as a pro photographer due to his source of income, but to slay the guy because he has an opinion or point of view is a bit OTT. IMO.
Regards
I might not have explained myself fully. I'm not slaying him for having an opinion. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, I've no problem with that. robbie_d wrote:
If it's emblazoned with 'Nikon' it's likely to be the best example of that type of product, in the world, ever.
Anything else is just a piece of "garbage" with "garbage features real photographers don't need".
The guy is a complete joke.
I think you'll find that Ken is now a Canonite. He praises Canon over Nikon these days. He even mentioned that his friend Karl Grobl was selling Canon equipment but failed to say that it was due to him jumping ship to Nikon.linkRR wrote:
It shows why the guy is a @#?>head. He does know how to get page hits though, quite how he managed to get to this level of notoriety I don't know though.
What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.
Like all of his reviews (most of which don't involve actually using the product in question):It shows why the guy is a @#?>head. He does know how to get page hits though, quite how he managed to get to this level of notoriety I don't know though.
What do you think of his review of the Pentax 645D , without laying hands on one I might add.
If it's emblazoned with 'Nikon' it's likely to be the best example of that type of product, in the world, ever.
Anything else is just a piece of "garbage" with "garbage features real photographers don't need".
The guy is a complete joke.
As for him being a complete joke? That's an opinion many in the world would disagree with. He gave up his full time job as he earns enough from his website, not funny some how.
I take Ken as I find him. Some articles are his point of view (entitled) others are very informative (if you use Nikon).
I don't think he produces stunning images or can be classed as a pro photographer due to his source of income, but to slay the guy because he has an opinion or point of view is a bit OTT. IMO.
Regards
The problem I have with Mr Rockwell is the delivery of his opinion (everything that isn't 100% useful to him is junk/garbage) and the basis of forming it (i.e. from a picture of the gear in question quite often).
I'll admit that some of his articles have drawn a wry smile out of me, but they are few and far between.
I'm not sure either, that the measure of a man is how much money his website makes. And as for the professional begging he now seems to have undertaken on said website, it's a bit cringe-worthy if you ask me.
Still, I'm sure he speaks very highly of me too
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Apparently.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 16:43
Link
K10D wrote:
Ken is now commercialised. With that, his raw technical dialogue has suffered. Some years back, I was intrigued with his articles. They were a refreshing change from the stuff I saw in some of the "too many" photographic magazines.
Regards
I think this echoes what I touched on above. Some of the older articles made me smile, virtually all of the newer stuff is about as much use to me as "junk features" are to him.
Ken is now commercialised. With that, his raw technical dialogue has suffered. Some years back, I was intrigued with his articles. They were a refreshing change from the stuff I saw in some of the "too many" photographic magazines.
Regards
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Apparently.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 16:45
Link
I think more is spoken about him that too him.
He is a character.
Regards
He is a character.
Regards
Too far from a shore.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 16:47
Link
K10D wrote:
I think more is spoken about him that too him.
He is a character.
Regards
That, I cannot deny.
I think more is spoken about him that too him.
He is a character.
Regards
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Apparently.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 17:00
Link
Quote:
He gave up his full time job as he earns enough from his website, not funny some how.
Maybe there's some reverse psychology there...He gave up his full time job as he earns enough from his website, not funny some how.
Ken: "The Pentax 645D is a rubbish toy"
Pentax: "Oh yeah? What if we lend/give you one so you can review it proper"
Ken: (Kerching!)
Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)
(For gallery, tips and links)
Posted 01/07/2010 - 17:16
Link
MattMatic wrote:
Ken: "The Pentax 645D is a rubbish toy"
Pentax: "Oh yeah? What if we lend/give you one so you can review it proper"
Ken: (Kerching!)
Matt
Very possibly...
Quote:
He gave up his full time job as he earns enough from his website, not funny some how.
Maybe there's some reverse psychology there...He gave up his full time job as he earns enough from his website, not funny some how.
Ken: "The Pentax 645D is a rubbish toy"
Pentax: "Oh yeah? What if we lend/give you one so you can review it proper"
Ken: (Kerching!)
Matt
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.
Apparently.
Apparently.
Posted 01/07/2010 - 18:30
Link
K10D wrote:
I think more is spoken about him that too him.
He is a character.
Regards
No, he is not. He is an idiot. His website is successful simply because so many people in the world are able to identify with him.I think more is spoken about him that too him.
He is a character.
Regards
G
(I don't mean to include you in that "many" by the way, though I am bemused by your support for an obvious nitwit!)
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
1691 posts
19 years
Richmond / Denbigh
It's all to do with FARTing according to the Nikon guru Ken Rockwell
link
Honk! Honk!
Can our Benjikan come up with something more imaginative I wonder?
F50 1.7. SMC-FAs 24, 35, 50 1.4, 85, 135. HD-FA15-30, DFA24-70, D-FA*70-200. The SMC-FA Limited Trinity.
Metz 45 CL-4, AF500FTZ. AF540FGZ.
Some Mamiya and some Nikon, and a Canon T70.