Ken Rockwell

Phaetonman

I've mentioned him a few times and seems people don't respect him that much. I don't know too much about photography but I do like his no bull**** cheap approach to things. What would peoples main issues be with him?

AnimalRights

He never stops begging for "donations".

quilmore

asking for donations is not what bothers me (I'd never do it anyway)
but the guy talks like the absolute truth on everything
I still read everything he publishes, but I've learnt to read him as if I read any of my pals, he's no reviewer and I've proven for myself he's not right backing some lenses (like saying the 18-55 kit lens is as good as the 17-55 2.8 or the praise he has for the 18-200vr)

he's one more of us, not even a great photographer (he's "good", just that)

Phaetonman

quilmore wrote: »

asking for donations is not what bothers me (I'd never do it anyway)
but the guy talks like the absolute truth on everything
I still read everything he publishes, but I've learnt to read him as if I read any of my pals, he's no reviewer and I've proven for myself he's not right backing some lenses (like saying the 18-55 kit lens is as good as the 17-55 2.8 or the praise he has for the 18-200vr)

he's one more of us, not even a great photographer (he's "good", just that)

I bought an 18-200vr off the back of his review. Oh dear

Arciphel

i think quillmore did as well (saw it up on adverts.ie a while back!)

quilmore

yes, as you said, I had one and it was based on ken's reviews
I have to say I was happy with it at the beginning , that was until I tried some serious glass... (costing half of what the 18-200vr cost me)

run_Forrest_run

I take what he says with a pinch of salt but he has some good points.
I also bought a 18-200VR but not entirely based on his review of it but now it's in a padded box making its way to Nikon service centre in the UK :mad:

Paulw

Some of his comments/opinions are alright. Some are opinions of opinions, without first hand experience. Some of his ideas can be debated.

He preaches, and his view is just one view. As for his asking for donations, well, considering his photography, I can see why.

AnimalRights

But he repeats it 2-3 times in each section, it's very off putting and it's not a normal send a donation, he throws in a sob story....it's a wonder he's not sat outside a pass machine in Liffy street!
Site is ok once or twice maybe for a different type of read compared to the normal type photography sites.

Arciphel

well all i can say is, twelve months ago i took what he said as being close to gospel, and i know people who are very knowledgeable about photography who still feel that way, but i have changed my opinion slightly. For one, he has admitted that he sometimes inserts deliberate untruths into his review (!) just for a laugh, but more damaging i think was the time recently where he came out as some kind of salesman for tiffen filters, saying how they are the best, he always uses them etc etc ... i think then you openly cross the line between being an independent reviewer and a company mouthpiece.