1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Ken rockwell amazing reviews

Discussion in 'Nikon FX DSLR Forum' started by basharar, Aug 14, 2008.

  1. Ken Rockwell posted a full technical review of the D700 long time ago right when the D700 was announced, he concluded that its performance is inferior to the D3 and the autofocus is as slow as the D300, Now since he actually got one, he is starting to change his views?!!!! but what about the thousands of innocent amateurs who believe in his trustworthy opinions.........:rolleyes: 

    D700 Update: I have one, and as you can see below, am working with it. The great news is that it borrows mostly from the D3 and not the D300. There are a couple of things the D700 can't do, like the professional 5:4 aspect ratio and mask the finder, but the D700 also does some things my D3 can't do, like set the INFO panel to pop up on the rear 3" LCD instantly whenever I hit the power-switch illuminator. The D700 also adds a great AUTO mode to ADR.

    If you're wondering if you ought to get a D700, yes!, go get one. If you've got a D3 there's no reason to throw it away, but if you don't have a D3, the D700 is just about as good for just about everything.

    The D3 is still faster and tougher for full-time pros and newsmen, but for weekend wedding shooters and amateurs, the D700 is it.

    Serious amateurs can kiss those squinty little finders and plasticy DX lenses of DX cameras goodbye forever! It's been a silly past few years.
  2. Leif


    Feb 12, 2006
    Ken is not one to let reality get in the way of a good story. :smile:

    He has a good business model. He writes lots in a confident clear know it all style. Loads of people visit on the basis that he must be an expert. He makes loads of advertising revenue. I suppose I could be rude about the guy, but to be honest, when I last looked at UK photographic magazines, a lot of the staff journalists were not exactly skilled photographers. Good journalists? Yes. Good photographers? Often not.
  3. I'd much prefer to trust the regular mass of forum opinion, sifted of course, than any single individual who needs to either attract clicks, like Ken, or advertising revenue, like magazine 'journalists'.
  4. +1

    He's just a more overt and strident version of what we sadly see every month in so-called magazine 'reviews'.

    Hell, at least he's got an opinion (regardless of how he comes to arrive at it) - vs the poorly researched and hyperbole-laden 'dance around the advertiser's check' magazines deliver us every month.

  5. His site has been a big help to me.....I like it.
  6. dutchtrumpet


    May 2, 2007
    I find his site interesting and always have. No one person is the final say.

    Ken Rockwell bashing is popular here and at dpr. I find it tacky.
  7. jimeast


    Mar 17, 2008
    Metrowest. MA
    Ken R's Site

    I think Ken's stuff is always fun to read. Parts of his review of the 200-400 made me laugh out loud, and not the technical parts. He seems very competent, but tends to keep the conversation light and in a different flavor than most reviewers.
  8. LB Jefferies

    LB Jefferies

    Jan 29, 2006
    Ken is full of crap and he openly admits that. LOL Why people take anything he says seriously just amazes me. :biggrin:

    Just my tuppence. :wink:
  9. Lurker


    Jul 21, 2007
    Keep in mind that half his reviews are about products he just read about. His remarks on lenses and cameras that he actually uses are actually pretty good.

    It's always fun to see how he burns down third party lenses. Except for the two or three sigma or tokina lenses he happens to own, those are all "amazingly good" :smile:
  10. the thing is he writes complete reviews/conclusions on products he has not touched.....amazing talent...
  11. Dunno why some people get so torqued by Ken. His style gets a lot of attention, and he's a riot to read IMO.
  12. Muonic


    Jun 14, 2006
    Since so many people say Ken is full of baloney, does that mean the D700 is actually a piece of junk instead of the good camera that he claims it to be?
  13. the problem is that he trashed the d700 at first then he got one and changed his mind, nothing wrong with that, but to write full on reviews and COMPARISON between the D700 and other cameras without even using the darn thing is some talent.....
  14. wbeem


    Feb 11, 2007
    Sanford, FL
    William Beem

    Advising people on the technical qualities of a product you've never even held in your hand is something I find tacky. More than that, I'm just not sure why he's regarded well by some folks. Like many others, I heard of his site when I first got going in digital photography and trusted what he had to say.

    Since then, I've had a few regretful purchases based upon nothing more than his opinion because he really hadn't thought the issues through very well. Sort of like buying the SB-600 when I should've popped for the 800. That advice was probably because Ken doesn't seem to understand off-camera lighting very well.

    I've also read his comments about laughing at folks who use a tripod while he shoots with his VR lens. I also enjoy my VR lenses, but I won't scoff at a tripod user. Let's face it, VR only goes so far and it won't help you with timed exposures or some multiple exposure shots.

    Finally, I've looked at the man's photographs. I'm not impressed by a single one of them. If they make him happy, then that's fine with me. I just don't really see the attraction there.
  15. When I first started learning, I read his site. Probably like most others since it pops up very high in search engines. But after I saw some things just didnt seem right on his site and then I read this I quit paying any attention to him:

    from his "About Me and My site" page.

    In Ken's own words

    "[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]This site is purely my personal speech and opinion, and a way for me to goof around.[/FONT]
    [FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]While often inspired by actual products and events, just like any other good news organization, I like to make things up and stretch the truth if they make an article more fun. In the case of new products, rumors and just plain silly stuff, it's all pretend. If you lack a good BS detector, please treat this entire site as a work of fiction.[/FONT] "
  16. Thaddeus


    Jul 24, 2008
    i use ken as a no bullsh*t baseline and read other views in comparison. often times they align, often times they don't. common sense and searching for real people personal experiences help it all filter out and form into a reasonable decision.

    you run into the same problem when you have one friend that is a canon fanboy and one is a nikon fanboy.
  17. revoke99


    Jul 26, 2008
    Marina Del Rey
    Ken...Ken..Kenn..He is very informative but I would do some other research as well..Also most of his reviews are actually lenses he never used before. I read he site too but take it with a grain of salt..My friend has went shooting with him on a meetup and she showed up.. He is a nice guy and emails him every now and then and gets back to him..I'm not bashing the guy I just don't think he is a good reliable source for reviews.
  18. jshurak


    Aug 14, 2008
    His site is interesting, I'm not sure I can call it super helpful. It seems like he goes into writing a review about a subject with a bias. I feel he writes a bit pretentious and abrasive. Regardless of writing style he reviews a product he hasn't even used yet.

    His writing style can be entertaining though.
  19. dwind

    dwind Guest

    I read him and pay attention to him and what he says as he takes a lot better pictures than I do and knows a lot more than I do.
  20. AGREED! 100% If you can do better, then DO IT!
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.