So whats the deal with Ken Rockwell?

[Derrel]

Rockwell is a genius troll

Well, yeah...sort of...he has some good stuff, and some bad stuff. Some very solid, practical advice, and some EXCELLENT lens recommendations, and some excellent "How-To Use Your Camera" guides for a number of Nikon models, all written in plain, simple English, for people who want to understand how to configure their Nikon d-slr cameras. He likes film photography. He used to really hate on digital, back in the early 2000's...but his tune has changed...I think he has some of the best "how-to" and some of the best real-world comparisons of equipment that one is likely to find written from a user's point of view, and not from the POV of say, a dispassionate, lab-coat-wearing European or UK internet testing geek. He cuts through a lot of bull$h!+, and yet, at the same time, spews a bit too much bull$h!+ and personal opinion to be considered a 100% trusted source...

On "some" topics, Rockwell's advice makes sense; he does a mostly good to excellent job of reviewing Nikon lenses, and especially older "forgotten" or "sleeper" types of lenses. On some topics, his deep-seated biases make his writings appear a bit, well, nutty, to me. He is like the proverbial two-edged sword...like the boy who cried wolf...like that skanky chick you knew in college....like that slime-bag boyfriend you had sophomore year, like that preacher who is also kind of a kinky little devil outside the congregation's view...

 

[Josh66]

He does have some stuff on his site that is actually good, usable information. There's a lot of crap too though.

If you can't tell the difference, you should probably stay away from his site.

 

[GeorgieGirl]

I have not read one word of this thread but for the OP's posts about Ken Rockwell...

KR does a decent job of putting his findings in place with data and photos and I put him in the mix with all the other sites for data and findings... he does a decent job IMHO.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

Rockwell is a genius troll

Well, yeah...sort of...he has some good stuff, and some bad stuff. Some very solid, practical advice, and some EXCELLENT lens recommendations, and some excellent "How-To Use Your Camera" guides for a number of Nikon models, all written in plain, simple English, for people who want to understand how to configure their Nikon d-slr cameras. He likes film photography. He used to really hate on digital, back in the early 2000's...but his tune has changed...I think he has some of the best "how-to" and some of the best real-world comparisons of equipment that one is likely to find written from a user's point of view, and not from the POV of say, a dispassionate, lab-coat-wearing European or UK internet testing geek. He cuts through a lot of bull$h!+, and yet, at the same time, spews a bit too much bull$h!+ and personal opinion to be considered a 100% trusted source...

On "some" topics, Rockwell's advice makes sense; he does a mostly good to excellent job of reviewing Nikon lenses, and especially older "forgotten" or "sleeper" types of lenses. On some topics, his deep-seated biases make his writings appear a bit, well, nutty, to me. He is like the proverbial two-edged sword...like the boy who cried wolf...like that skanky chick you knew in college....like that slime-bag boyfriend you had sophomore year, like that preacher who is also kind of a kinky little devil outside the congregation's view...

Just don't take him seriously...He doesn't even take himself seriously!

Quote from the first few lines of his site:

"I've been real careful this past week: no driving (the biggest hazard adults face), staying away from windows (amateur snipers; pro snipers see through walls, "a.k.a. most obscurrants," with deep-IR sights), and etc., and I made through to today! Yes!"

You just gotta know what's real and what's BS. He even says so himself on the About section

 

[Garbz]

The only real problem with Ken Rockwell is that he's not consistent in anything. If you want to be a serious review site, then be a serious review site, if you want to be The Onion of the camera world, then by all means do so.

The sad part is that people visit his site to learn. They find pages with good writeups and then think he's a genius yet they lack the experience to identify which of his pages are just practical jokes. This makes his site dangerous and this is why I warn people to stay clear of it.

There should be a big disclaimer on his site saying "warning this site has professional oriented content. "Yes I have been taking photos for over 18 years" / "No I have not yet come of photographic age""

 

[KmH]

It's unfortunate many people today can't decern the difference between a serious review, and satire.

I see no problem with mixing the 2 on a single web site, particularly when the author himself mentions the site contains both types of content.

 

[The_Traveler]

It's unfortunate many people today can't decern the difference between a serious review, and satire.

I see no problem with mixing the 2 on a single web site, particularly when the author himself mentions the site contains both types of content.

Well I look at lots of photos posted and I'm never certain if the OP is kidding or not.

 

[jwbryson1]

I used to read KR daily. Now I read it less often and spend most of my time here. I think KR's website is good for certain things.

I also like to read the information on Thom Hogan's website found here:

Thom Hogan's Nikon Field Guide and Nikon Flash Guide

 

[MTVision]

Well I look at lots of photos posted and I'm never certain if the OP is kidding or not.

 

[jake337]

You have to understand his humor, have common sense and read between the lines.

 

[harriknight]

He has a few decent pages, but the majority of it is subtle trolling. Also, he has weird crap like this scattered around his website...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/ri/WhereDoBabiesComeFrom.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/analprobe/index.htm

 

[GnipGnop]

Ken Rockwell's trash can on his desktop is a link to EXPLORE page on flickr.

 

[chuasam]

Ken Rockwell is the FOX News of Photo related writing.
Here is a list of facts about Ken Rockwell:

• 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

 

[GnipGnop]

I remember reading that a long time ago and laughing at the ducks comment. Then I came here and laughed even more.

 

[newb]

Ken Rockwell is a douche canoe. Everything he states is personal opinion.

I actually lol'd at this.

I usually look at his reviews because they come up with searches for things Im interested in. I dont seek them out, and trust them to be the end all review. He was right about my Pro Optic fish eye though.

I like the buyer beware link, specifically the "Inconsistent Reviews" part. Just grabbing for straws there.