# Ken Rockwell



## abraxas (Jan 16, 2009)

Why does this guy upset everyone so much?

I've been to his site a couple times. As far as I can see, it's just another web site by some guy.

Apparently I'm missing something.

Why is his opinion so important to you?


----------



## dxqcanada (Jan 16, 2009)

Yeah so am I.

Hmm, maybe this is why?


----------



## nmerrick (Jan 16, 2009)

I've never been upset by Mr. Rockwell's site at all - I've found his writings to be interesting, fascinating and to be taken like french fries - with a pinch of salt.

He is obviously successful at what he does and supports his family with his web site - maybe that's what gets some people's trousers flapping.

Nigel


----------



## Ken Rockwell (Jan 16, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Why does this guy upset everyone so much?
> 
> I've been to his site a couple times. As far as I can see, it's just another web site by some guy.
> 
> ...




beats me...


----------



## abraxas (Jan 16, 2009)

Ken Rockwell said:


> beats me...



Ken,

Is it really you?  How can we verify this?

It would be cool.


----------



## Dao (Jan 16, 2009)

Ken Rockwell said:


> beats me...



Welcome to the forum ...


----------



## AdamBomb (Jan 16, 2009)

I haven't had any issues with him AT ALL! I find his site VERY useful and his, "Plain English" guides are a lot better than reading the manual, although I still did.


----------



## Ken Rockwell (Jan 16, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Ken,
> 
> Is it really you?  How can we verify this?
> 
> It would be cool.




I don't know.... what would like me to do?

Truthfully, I'm just here because my google alerts were off the wall for this site today.


----------



## Ricky Ortiz (Jan 16, 2009)

Ken Rockwell said:


> I don't know.... what would like me to do?
> 
> Truthfully, I'm just here because my google alerts were off the wall for this site today.


 Hey Ken just want to say if it is really you that I use your site alot by reading your reviews on products before i buy them thank you!!


----------



## ~Stella~ (Jan 16, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Is it really you?





> Occupation
> 
> Making advanced photo enthusiasts fight mad


Maybe not. :er:

I don't know the guy from Adam, though so it doesn't matter to me either way.

ETA -  He could easily post a photo/video of himself, say, dancing a jig or holding a sign that says "TPF is Da Bomb" as proof.


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 16, 2009)

Or we could just ask dEARlEADER...


----------



## ~Stella~ (Jan 16, 2009)

My way is more fun.


----------



## stsinner (Jan 16, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Ken,
> 
> Is it really you?  How can we verify this?
> 
> It would be cool.




Yeah right.

As stated, he would have to hold a TPF sign or something..  

But I don't think it is..  I'm going to pray about it, and I'll let you know what I come up with.


----------



## Ken Rockwell (Jan 16, 2009)

~Stella~ said:


> Maybe not. :er:
> 
> I don't know the guy from Adam, though so it doesn't matter to me either way.
> 
> ETA -  He could easily post a photo/video of himself, say, dancing a jig or holding a sign that says "TPF is Da Bomb" as proof.



I just added that in for humor.  I see I'm not too popular here.  As far as proof I don't there I'll be around very much longer.  I just finished my Leica lens review and am looking for inspiration for my next post.

Goodbye all!


----------



## abraxas (Jan 16, 2009)

Ken Rockwell said:


> I don't know.... what would like me to do?
> 
> Truthfully, I'm just here because my google alerts were off the wall for this site today.



OT. So those Google Alerts really work?- I got something in mind for them.

I just read a fair-goodly amount regarding some of the things I've heard that you write.  I'm impressed that so folks disagree with you so strongly.  Especially about, 'the camera doesn't matter.'

Maybe a verification could be placing three periods "..." at the bottom of your home page for us (let us know when to look ok?).  

I read in another post of yours, re: using a tripod, and understand how you can be controversial.  Pretty cool.

You'll be in Barstow next month?


----------



## ~Stella~ (Jan 16, 2009)

Ken Rockwell said:


> I just added that in for humor.



And I added my posts for the same reason, was that not clear?

An admin could easily run his IP addy for location and confirm that it does or does not match another member's, or course.

If it is him, he should stick around and chat; I'm sure plenty of people would be honestly interested in his thoughts.


----------



## kundalini (Jan 16, 2009)

Oh Ken, don't be so humble.... you are ever so popular here on TPF.  Which way the wind blows is another story.  Please stay familiar with us.

Some of your stuff is funny and I do like to be entertained.  thank you.


----------



## abraxas (Jan 16, 2009)

That was a whirlwind of excitment! 

So anyway,...

Why does this guy upset everyone so much?

I've been to his site a couple times. As far as I can see, it's just another web site by some guy.

Apparently I'm missing something.

Why is his opinion so important to you?


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 16, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Why is his opinion so important to you?



It's not - but that doesn't stop it from being fun to read.


----------



## Ejazzle (Jan 16, 2009)

I hope everyone shows there true colors about him even though they know he's reading. I for one find his website helpful. Before i buy a lens his review is one of the few i read.


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 16, 2009)

Ejazzle said:


> even though they know he's reading



Is he?  ...I'm skeptical about that.


----------



## stsinner (Jan 16, 2009)

Wouldn't some jackass just love to sign in here as Ken Rockwell and ride that wave of popularity..  There's not way it's KR..  He won't even return emails because he claims he's too busy...


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 16, 2009)

stsinner said:


> He won't even return emails because he claims he's too busy...



How do you know?


----------



## kundalini (Jan 16, 2009)

stsinner said:


> ... There's not way it's KR.. He won't even return emails because he claims he's too busy...


 *pisses in my cornflakes*


Say it ain't so Joe.


----------



## stsinner (Jan 16, 2009)

O|||||||O said:


> How do you know?



Here's a cut and paste from his website after I clicked on the _contact_ tab:

_[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Hundreds of people email me every single day, but I don't read email more often then once a  month. It's highly unlikely that I'll be able to read anything, much less reply, unless your message is lucidly relevant, short and directly to-the-point. [/FONT]_​ _[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]I couldn't possibly  keep adding to this site if I stopped to read email each week. [/FONT]_​ _[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]THANKS! [/FONT]_​ [FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]_Kenny. _
[/FONT]

And here's the link..  
[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]​


----------



## Garbz (Jan 17, 2009)

Wow hundreds of people email every day. He reads once a month. So that's 3100 emails on a long month and 2800 on a short month, and if your message is lucidly relevant he will read it?

So he opens all his 3000 emails and looks for the one liners?

Oh wait he said hundreds, plural, so probably 6000 emails in one sitting. Man this guy must have some good coffee.


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Jan 17, 2009)

Our member here seems to be coming from Ontario, whereas Ken's site is in Maryland. I'm sure Ken could be travelling and there's not a huge distance between the two, but I remain to be convinced either way.


----------



## fwellers (Jan 17, 2009)

I agree. Being a beginner, his site is one of the ones that I found very helpful. Some of his opinions are controversial, and even I don't take all of his advice, as I bought a D90 instead of a D40. But still, he puts a lot out there for people to read.   
I do respect his opinion for what it is, and appreciate anyone who spends time doing reviews so that I can benefit.


----------



## ksmattfish (Jan 17, 2009)

There is some good info at his site.  Unfortunately in the last few years he's decided it's more profitable/attention grabbing to be controversial.  It's like reading someone who has a split personality:  digital vs film, gear is important (he is running a gear site) vs gear doesn't matter, etc....  I think he's doing it for the google hits these days.  

I followed the recent post here to his article about digital, aperture diffraction, and tripods, and it seemed more like a pointless rant.  I'd say it would be more likely to confuse people about aperture diffraction and camera shake than educate them about it.

Personally he doesn't annoy me any more than any other gear masturbating, internet, photo know-it-alls like the guys at The Online Photographer: or The Luminous Landscape  They all post stuff that informs me and annoys me, but I keep coming back.  Every once in a while there's a real gem, and I don't want to miss it.


----------



## ksmattfish (Jan 17, 2009)

Chris of Arabia said:


> Our member here seems to be coming from Ontario...



Possibly a KR groupie?

My favorite KR controversy so far has been Michael Reichmann's (Luminous Landscape) response to Ken's article about the gear doesn't matter.  Just a tip, never tell the guy with the $50K camera that gear doesn't matter; it's his entire reason for being!    I'm sure you can find the numerous response articles and forum posts over in the LL archives.  They are hilarious!


----------



## stsinner (Jan 17, 2009)

ksmattfish said:


> Possibly a KR groupie?
> 
> My favorite KR controversy so far has been Michael Reichmann's (Luminous Landscape) response to Ken's article about the gear doesn't matter.  Just a tip, never tell the guy with the $50K camera that gear doesn't matter; it's his entire reason for being!    I'm sure you can find the numerous response articles and forum posts over in the LL archives.  They are hilarious!



Funny, I clicked on the Luminous Landscape link to see what a $50k camera looks like, and I don't even like the picture of the mountains that comes up..  Does absolutely nothing for me..  I guess that's like the art gallery where millionaires pay thousands for ugly paintings.  I just don't get it.  Maybe it's my lack of culture.

What could justify that stupid price unless you intend to look at the photos under a microscope.  Only a jackass would spend that for a camera when you can got a 5dMII.. That's serious penis envy.


----------



## Garbz (Jan 17, 2009)

stsinner said:


> Only a jackass would spend that for a camera when you can got a 5dMII.. That's serious penis envy.



Congratulations, you in running for the dumbest comment of the week award. You are fighting with other contenders such as:
"I can't see the bullet, is it supposed to be visible at the end of the barrel?"
and
"Nah bro, this hill is not too steep for a beginner snowboarder."

The winner of the contest will be announced by Ken Rockwell somewhere on his horribly designed site in 10min.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 17, 2009)

Garbz said:


> Congratulations, you in running for the dumbest comment of the week award. You are fighting with other contenders such as:
> "I can't see the bullet, is it supposed to be visible at the end of the barrel?"
> and
> "Nah bro, this hill is not too steep for a beginner snowboarder."
> ...


----------



## stsinner (Jan 17, 2009)

Garbz said:


> Congratulations, you in running for the dumbest comment of the week award. You are fighting with other contenders such as:
> "I can't see the bullet, is it supposed to be visible at the end of the barrel?"
> and
> "Nah bro, this hill is not too steep for a beginner snowboarder."
> ...



You seriously think there's a camera worth $50k?  Astounding.  That would be the dumbest comment of the week.

When you can currently get a camera that captures the reality of the scene with perfect precision for $2k, that is absolutely no justification for paying more.  Oh yeah, it's not reality we're looking for here, but a well photoshopped image, totally untrue to reality..  Forgot.

Here-try this..  Go here and examine both pictures and point out to to me the differences.  Maybe I'm missing something.  Of course I don't have a $50k monitor, which you probably need to appreciate the images from the Hasselblad..  

For me, it's like anything else..  You can buy a Toyota Camry, which will go 120 mph, even though you are never allowed to, last 20 years easy with every day use and still have resale value.  Or if you can afford it you can buy a Ferrari, which will go 180 mph, even though 75 is the fastest speed you're ever legally allowed to drive it, will be in the shop constantly if you try to use it as a daily driver, and will be uncomfortable, impractical and expensive to own..  It does nothing better than that Toyota, and is much more of an expensive pain in the ass to own, but hey, you can afford it, so why not have it. 

Yeah, I guess it would be cool to own a $50k camera just so people could envy me.  My next purchase would be a microscope so that I could put my pictures under it every now and then to remind myself why I bought it.


----------



## Chiller (Jan 17, 2009)

Chris of Arabia said:


> Our member here seems to be coming from Ontario, whereas Ken's site is in Maryland. I'm sure Ken could be travelling and there's not a huge distance between the two, but I remain to be convinced either way.


   Betcha it is Anty.   Who is Ken Rockwell anyways. :er:


----------



## Overread (Jan 17, 2009)

stsinner - your comparing webshots not actual photos. Most photos on the net are only around 1000pixels or less on the longest side - that is 1/3 the size from a 10MP digital cam and even smaller from something of the hassy type. 
Once you downsize by that much good editing can get results that look very similar and if the internet is your only medium of distribution of photos then the $50K hassy is not the best choice since you are wasting so much of the quality that you gain in a larger photo size.
Where it sells its own is in printing quality - being able to print large photos with high quality results. 

There is a reason and a market for the camera else it would not sell at all - pros might like flashy kit but at the end of the day the kit has to work well in oder to turn a profit to let the pro remain a pro - ergo there is a reason beyond the ego one for choosing such a camera


----------



## xposurepro (Jan 17, 2009)

So if I start doing things to get on everybodys nerves and make people dislike me does that mean you guys will all start visiting my blog like crazy and I will become famous?


----------



## Village Idiot (Jan 17, 2009)

I just wanted to say, Ken Rockwell is a joke.

That's it.


----------



## usayit (Jan 17, 2009)

Wow... KR google alert for this site must be through the roof today... heheh lol


----------



## Phranquey (Jan 17, 2009)

Ejazzle said:


> I hope everyone shows there true colors about him even though they know he's reading. I for one find his website helpful. Before i buy a lens his review is one of the few i read.


 
Gladly.  Whenever I am doing research on a new piece of equipment to buy, I always google "Xxxxx review", and his site always seems to pop up.  I will read his reviews, accept some of his technical data & opinions along with many others, and make my choice.  As far as personalities, the guy is a pompous a$$ who believes that his is the only opinion that matters.  "If _I_ can do it this way, why should anyone want to do it any different......"


----------



## stsinner (Jan 17, 2009)

Overread said:


> stsinner - your comparing webshots not actual photos. Most photos on the net are only around 1000pixels or less on the longest side - that is 1/3 the size from a 10MP digital cam and even smaller from something of the hassy type.
> Once you downsize by that much good editing can get results that look very similar and if the internet is your only medium of distribution of photos then the $50K hassy is not the best choice since you are wasting so much of the quality that you gain in a larger photo size.
> Where it sells its own is in printing quality - being able to print large photos with high quality results.
> 
> There is a reason and a market for the camera else it would not sell at all - pros might like flashy kit but at the end of the day the kit has to work well in oder to turn a profit to let the pro remain a pro - ergo there is a reason beyond the ego one for choosing such a camera



I'll concede that..  I guess it's just like Rolex..  Does it keep better time than a $5 Wal Mart quartz watch?  Maybe by one or two seconds a year.  Will people pay $10k for one?  Yep.  

So how does a camera like this compare to the new 24MP super cameras that cost a couple thousand?  Are the pictures really better enough to justify the $48k difference?


----------



## dEARlEADER (Jan 17, 2009)

O|||||||O said:


> Or we could just ask dEARlEADER...



Don't blame me...... blame the man!


----------



## dEARlEADER (Jan 17, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> I just wanted to say, Ken Rockwell is a joke.
> 
> That's it.





HEY!.... that's my line...


----------



## Garbz (Jan 18, 2009)

stsinner said:


> You seriously think there's a camera worth $50k?  Astounding.  That would be the dumbest comment of the week.
> 
> When you can currently get a camera that captures the reality of the scene with perfect precision for $2k, that is absolutely no justification for paying more.



Let me guess like many here including me you are a serious amateur? Yeah in that case a $50k camera is nothing more than a penis extension. But there are entire industries which rely on being able to capture 50mpx images, and if I am selling huge wall paintings for $5000 each I doubt Joe Customer will be satisfied with looking at an lovely upsampled image. Oh sure you can try telling them otherwise. Good luck to you.



stsinner said:


> For me, it's like anything else..  You can buy a Toyota Camry, which will go 120 mph, even though you are never allowed to, last 20 years easy with every day use and still have resale value.  Or if you can afford it you can buy a Ferrari, which will go 180 mph, even though 75 is the fastest speed you're ever legally allowed to drive it, will be in the shop constantly if you try to use it as a daily driver, and will be uncomfortable, impractical and expensive to own..  It does nothing better than that Toyota, and is much more of an expensive pain in the ass to own, but hey, you can afford it, so why not have it.



This just proves my point. Michael Schumacher didn't drive a Toyota Camry either, and I doubt he would have won quite as many races if he did. Oh and there's no legal limit to camera megapixles and neither is there a speed limit in most races


----------



## Flash Harry (Jan 18, 2009)

If you look at the difference between prints from 35mm, 6x6cm and 5x4in neg then transfer these values to DSLR, say 12mp, 21mp then 50mp then you should understand why the higher resolution bodies are in the marketplace, its not all photoshop & genuine fractals. H


----------



## dEARlEADER (Jan 19, 2009)

Looks like this one needs a BUMP


----------



## Garbz (Jan 20, 2009)

dEARIEADER I just clicked the link in your signature. But the sound was muted. You have no idea how much of a close call that was just now.


----------



## abraxas (Jan 20, 2009)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0"]Ken Rockwell Jr[/ame]?


----------



## Overread (Jan 20, 2009)

certainly possible


----------



## dEARlEADER (Jan 20, 2009)

Garbz said:


> dEARIEADER I just clicked the link in your signature. But the sound was muted. You have no idea how much of a close call that was just now.




Sure the sound was muted..... that's what they all say.....

and the beat goes on


----------



## Overread (Jan 20, 2009)

not if Hitler has anything to say about it
[ame=http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-r9dzc0duUw&NR=1]YouTube - Hitler gets his birthday surprise![/ame]

ps some bad language - though its all subtitles


----------



## stsinner (Jan 20, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Ken Rockwell Jr?



DAMMIT!!


----------



## dEARlEADER (Jan 20, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Ken Rockwell Jr?




lol... i didn't realize it was linked until sstiner got smoked....

but.... luckily for me.... the sound was muted....


----------



## Garbz (Jan 20, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Ken Rockwell Jr?



Dammit the sound was on this time, and it is all Hertz van Rental's fault for showing that smile video on youtube in the off topic forum


----------



## abraxas (Jan 21, 2009)

Ok- I won't do that no more.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWSjUe0FyxQ"]I'll leave Ken Rockwell Alone[/ame]


-


----------



## Garbz (Jan 21, 2009)

Fool me once abraxas


----------

