Letter to Mr Rockwell in regards to his 5Dmkiii review

Status
Not open for further replies.
TexPhoto said:
Can I ask why all of you keep reading his stuff if you do not agree with him, or find some value in his posts? Seriously this is like a bunch of old women arguing that Nancy dies her hair.
00STQc-110051984.jpg


In all fairness, as long as Ken has the right to vomit all over the Internet, we have the right to complain about him. It's only fair. It's also nothing like old women clucking about something superficial. He puts himself out there by giving advice and reviews that are blatantly wrong. I feel sorry for the people new to photography that read his literary diahria and just don't know better.
 
Upvote 0
D_Rochat said:
TexPhoto said:
Can I ask why all of you keep reading his stuff if you do not agree with him, or find some value in his posts? Seriously this is like a bunch of old women arguing that Nancy dies her hair.
00STQc-110051984.jpg


In all fairness, as long as Ken has the right to vomit all over the Internet, we have the right to complain about him. It's only fair. It's also nothing like old women clucking about something superficial. He puts himself out there by giving advice and reviews that are blatantly wrong. I feel sorry for the people new to photography that read his literary diahria and just don't know better.

There is a long list of things which you have the right to do, but should probably still avoid. I made no attempt to involve your rights in the discussion. Ken makes his living off his website and you guys are free to advertise it to your hearts content. I just think you should consider shopping at the dress barn for a nice blue house dress and consider a blue wig.

I like Ken's lens reviews, and back when I was a Nikon shooter, found them quite helpful, and even spoke to him on the phone a few times about the details. It has been about five years since, and I don't read it much anymore. I'd never have read his 5D3 or D800 review if not listed and linked here.
 
Upvote 0
D_Rochat said:
TexPhoto said:
Can I ask why all of you keep reading his stuff if you do not agree with him, or find some value in his posts? Seriously this is like a bunch of old women arguing that Nancy dies her hair.
00STQc-110051984.jpg


In all fairness, as long as Ken has the right to vomit all over the Internet, we have the right to complain about him. It's only fair. It's also nothing like old women clucking about something superficial. He puts himself out there by giving advice and reviews that are blatantly wrong. I feel sorry for the people new to photography that read his literary diahria and just don't know better.

This thread is officially awesome. Shit is getting slung around, people are dropping the term bogans (random), memes are being created. I should write letters to shit heads more often.

l.jpg
 
Upvote 0
V8 M8,

then I find this gem in his review of the 50mm 1.2

"If you're a regular photographer like me, personally I rarely use middle focal lengths and prefer the convenience of a zoom."

I think he's bipolar :)

ET
 
Upvote 0
V8Beast said:
EYEONE said:
Anyone ever seen the videos on youtube where he wonders around B&H like a buffoon, claims that good sports photographers should not need super teles, delcares a EVIL camera has too many buttons and all other sorts of nonsense??

The guy's even more annoying in person. I didn't know that was possible.

I made it 2 mins into that vid and couldn't take it anymore
 
Upvote 0
You guys entirely have the wrong idea. You obsess about the little details of what he says and miss the bigger picture. People like him are good to listen to - you'll get ideas and see things in a way differently from anybody else. Maybe you only use a little of what he says, maybe nothing, but maybe it gets you to think differently and see photography from a different viewpoint for a while.

For example, last week I came across his articles about wide angle lenses and tripods. First on tripods, since then I've been really thinking - why do I carry a tripod around? Is it really necessary? Am I over using it, under using it? On wide angles - which I've always preferred - these are the first articles that I've found which talked the same reasons about why I like them.

People that say controversial things are more interesting than most, and at best you'll learn something new, and at worst you'll be entertained.
 
Upvote 0
FunPhotons said:
You guys entirely have the wrong idea. You obsess about the little details of what he says and miss the bigger picture. People like him are good to listen to - you'll get ideas and see things in a way differently from anybody else?

I have no problem with people that "see things differently," but Mr. Rockwell often "sees things differently" because he doesn't know what he's talking about. How can anyone read something like "pro don't use mid-range zooms" and still take this guy seriously? Apparently, someone who takes overly saturated snapshots of a picnic bench with a $3,000 camera is qualified to speak on behalf of all pros.

People that say controversial things are more interesting than most, and at best you'll learn something new, and at worst you'll be entertained.

What he says isn't controversial. It's jut ill-informed and ignorant. So Ken's clearly an enthusiasts who just loves tinkering with photo gear, and has no skills to back it up. There's nothing wrong with that. However, I've never come across anyone who produces such underwhelming work that tries to speak so authoritatively on any subject matter.
 
Upvote 0
V8Beast said:
How can anyone read something like "pro don't use mid-range zooms" and still take this guy seriously?

Quite clearly amateurs use mid range zooms, therefore pros dont.

Not too sure what he means by mid range - I would say the 70-200 is a mid range - wow, pros dont use this :o :o :o
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.