| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/28/2008 01:46:02 PM · #176 |
If you want your camera to be quiet, use a blimp.
No, not the Goodyear kind... |
|
|
|
05/28/2008 02:16:42 PM · #177 |
Originally posted by Mr_Pants:
Quiet mode was available on the mkII, but could only be accessed via Personal Function. |
Yup, I've used it a few times on my mkII. Makes quite a difference. |
|
|
|
06/13/2008 07:25:02 PM · #178 |
I recently was doing a bit of research on purchasing a decent tripod and I ran across this article:
Rockewell review
He starts out with ‘forget the tripod, it is not necessary with today’s digital cameras.
So of course I had to check out his work. And well, long story short. I now own a decent midrange Tripod.
Thanks Ken Rockwell for the Yoda insight, and let me just say… Focus dude.
|
|
|
|
06/13/2008 07:42:10 PM · #179 |
What! Don't use a tripod? Geez, that's going to make remote-controlled self-portraits a bit more difficult.
|
|
|
|
06/13/2008 10:34:56 PM · #180 |
Ken sucks, period. Some of his advice may be useful, but is no more special than any other resource on such topics, and it is mixed with his own expert "opinions" which he calls facts.
Guy needs to be run off the net...
"Repeating flash is useless, no professional uses a repeating flash, it is only to amuse consumers who don't know how to photograph."
"A camera which beeps is not professional, no professional camera beeps and it only annoys the professionals around them."
"The SB-800 flash is a total waste of money, the only benefit it has is being able to control other flashes. If you want to do that just buy a CLS control module without flash function for $200 more because I said so."
Ugh...
|
|
|
|
06/13/2008 10:43:07 PM · #181 |
But Ken is on onexposure.net! He's in their new book!
This is serious art by the modern masters; you won't see anything from techies who call him stupid, like Askey, Reichmann, Morris, Hogan, or togtog (hehe) there. |
|
|
|
06/13/2008 11:32:27 PM · #182 |
Originally posted by option:
But Ken is on onexposure.net! He's in their new book!
This is serious art by the modern masters; you won't see anything from techies who call him stupid, like Askey, Reichmann, Morris, Hogan, or togtog (hehe) there. |
I kind of forgot about that site. My one and only picture there was Pic of the Day at New Year. ;-Ʋ |
|
|
|
06/14/2008 01:09:43 AM · #183 |
A quick perusal of his website has revealed a man who does his homework, who is thorough to a superlative level, and who has the great courage to demonstrate confidence in a social atmosphere in which mediocrity is praised because it doesn't offend anyone.
"Nobody gets through life without being thought a fool by somebody, therefore 'tis better to speak up and be thought Wise by a minority than to remain silent running the risk of being thought Wise by no one." Winston Middlesbrough
Message edited by author 2008-06-17 02:34:36.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2008 01:28:06 AM · #184 |
Yikes, sorta hard on the guy here. I guess the TOS rules regarding not bashing other members doesn't seem to apply to him even though he is a registered user. Poor guy and shame this thread isn't locked yet. Certainly doesn't do much for this site's image by allowing this silly and "jealous" banter to continue.
I agree, at least he is willing to stick his neck out and give opinions in a manner that is well presented and in most cases, rather informative. Though he may miss the mark at times, I've cross referenced his articles on numerous occaisions when seeking opinions on equipment etc.
Should he join this site? Why the hell would he when he is bashed with this crap. Real shame.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2008 01:45:28 AM · #185 |
Ivo, you should note that this thread has existed since 2006 and has been commented on by photographers of all walks of life, including DPC council members.
Also, there is nothing silly about this. His website is one of the most popular photography advice websites on the web. Which makes it the most important to be extra critical of his every word. He is in position to cause a great amount of confusion among new photographers and may even cost them hundreds of dollars in wrong choices all the while pretending to know it all, if such a thing were even possible.
So member or not, he is at the top of the chain and in the spot light, such is the price of any sort of fame and respect. |
|
|
|
06/14/2008 02:00:04 AM · #186 |
Originally posted by togtog:
Ivo, you should note that this thread has existed since 2006 and has been commented on by photographers of all walks of life, including DPC council members.
Also, there is nothing silly about this. His website is one of the most popular photography advice websites on the web. Which makes it the most important to be extra critical of his every word. He is in position to cause a great amount of confusion among new photographers and may even cost them hundreds of dollars in wrong choices all the while pretending to know it all, if such a thing were even possible.
So member or not, he is at the top of the chain and in the spot light, such is the price of any sort of fame and respect. |
On the contrary, he is stating opinions and that in itself is admirable. If it is perceived by some that he is at "the top of the chain" regarding photographic prowess, that is a choice made by those who have bestowed that title upon him. If choices were made that cost people money, they were choices motivated by a lack of due diligence. The need to berate an individual simply demonstrates an apparent lack of self worth manifested by lashing out at those who are accomplished. The need to be extra critical of his every word may be a prudent choice but done in an openly indiscriminate manner bordering personal assault, is pathetic.
You can point your finger at someone in blame but remember there are three of your own fingers pointed back at yourself. |
|
|
|
06/14/2008 02:21:08 AM · #187 |
Originally posted by 777STAN:
"Nobody gets through life without being thought a fool by somebody, therefore 'tis better to speak up and be thought Wise by a minority than to remain silent running the risk of being thought Wise by no one."[/i] Winston Middlesbrough |
"Better to be thought a fool, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt." -Samuel Clemmens
Edit: Wait maybe this one is more to your liking. :-P
"Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding." Bible, 'Proverbs' 17:28.
Message edited by author 2008-06-14 02:25:01. |
|
|
|
06/14/2008 03:52:51 AM · #188 |
Originally posted by Ivo:
Originally posted by togtog:
Ivo, you should note that this thread has existed since 2006 and has been commented on by photographers of all walks of life, including DPC council members.
Also, there is nothing silly about this. His website is one of the most popular photography advice websites on the web. Which makes it the most important to be extra critical of his every word. He is in position to cause a great amount of confusion among new photographers and may even cost them hundreds of dollars in wrong choices all the while pretending to know it all, if such a thing were even possible.
So member or not, he is at the top of the chain and in the spot light, such is the price of any sort of fame and respect. |
On the contrary, he is stating opinions and that in itself is admirable. If it is perceived by some that he is at "the top of the chain" regarding photographic prowess, that is a choice made by those who have bestowed that title upon him. If choices were made that cost people money, they were choices motivated by a lack of due diligence. The need to berate an individual simply demonstrates an apparent lack of self worth manifested by lashing out at those who are accomplished. The need to be extra critical of his every word may be a prudent choice but done in an openly indiscriminate manner bordering personal assault, is pathetic.
You can point your finger at someone in blame but remember there are three of your own fingers pointed back at yourself. |
So anyone who states an opinion even if misleading is admirable?
The blind man follows the loudest voice. His website is very popular. He does a great job of sounding like an expert on all things Nikon and photography. The blind lap up his words in droves. A persons status in the eyes of others does not deem their true worth.
Who is to be blamed when the blind fall into the pit, the person leading them in, or themselves?
I am very sorry you believe this to be motivated by jealousy. I cannot speak for anyone else but I could care less if he was a homeless man or the second coming of christ, if he gives bad advice, I'm going to hit him as hard as I can. I hope, that anyone would do the same to me in return if I gave bad advice.
See, I like to help people. That in itself makes me feel good. If I learn my advice has hurt someone, I don't go on repeating it. I apologize and do what I can to make up for any harm I caused. I want to know when I screw up so I do not screw up again.
Ken does not seem to share this view on life. He has obviously found the perfect solution for life success and all anyone needs to do is follow his exact words to be just like him. Only problem is, other people are not him, and what worked for him will not work for others.
Ken is a public figure, he became one when he created a website and pointed someone at it. The more popular a public figure becomes, the more visible, the more important it is to make sure they do not use that visibility to their advantage against others, to make sure their words and motivations are sound and truthful.
As I said, I love helping people, I love photography. Photography isn't a business to me like some, it is a true passion. I take it very personally, when someone, misleads those new to the art. It is horrific to me when I see someone spouting lies and misinformation about what I and others love. And worse of all, instead of stepping back and looking at his record, instead of adopting a plan to give unbiased advice, instead of apologizing, he sends these bots to DPC to post in this thread stating how helpful he is linking to his site.
However yes, in all fairness, there is no proof he hires the bots that spam for him, they could be his enemies trying to dirty his image further. And yes, some of his advice is sound. However he IS biased to the most extreme, to the point he ignores the truth because he either cannot see it or cannot accept it.
So, again, I believe I have been fair with him. Again, I cannot speak for others in this thread.
Message edited by author 2008-06-14 03:53:13. |
|
|
|
06/14/2008 08:11:00 AM · #189 |
Originally posted by togtog:
So, again, I believe I have been fair with him. |
RIGHT!!!!
Maybe you ought to go to his site and read his caveat. Personally, I think you're way off base and downright arrogant, rude, and presumptuous to someone who openly states this:
"About Me and My Site
Caveat Lector! (reader beware!)
This is my personal website. I do it all by myself. I'm just one guy with a computer who likes to take pictures. I have the playful, immature and creative, trouble-making mind of a seven-year-old, so read accordingly.
This site is purely my personal speech and opinion, and a way for me to goof around.
While often inspired by actual products and events, just like any other good news organization, I like to make things up when they make the site more fun. If you lack a good BS detector, please treat this site as a creative work of fiction. This site is provided only for the entertainment of my personal friends, dogs, family and myself. I've never promoted this site. If you're reading this, you got here on your own.
Read this site at your own risk. I make a lot of mistakes. I have no proof-reader and there are plenty of pages, like this one, which have been around since the 1990s and may no longer apply or be correct. I'm just one guy. No mater how stupid something may be, if I don't catch it, it gets out there anyway and stays wrong for years until someone points it out. I can't track everything; I've written thousand of pages and write a few more every day.
If you find anything out of whack, please let me know, since there are a lot more of you than there are of me. "
Personally, I find him amusing and informative, and as he suggests, I take his advice with a grain of salt.
HOWEVER, I do find him to be extremely knowledgeable, and I think it's great that he takes the time to offer his OPINIONS to anyone who wants.
I do my own homework from there, make my own choices, and don't blame him if it doesn't meet MY expectations.
|
|
|
|
06/14/2008 06:54:38 PM · #190 |
 togtog, you've made your point. Let it rest, please. |
|
|
|
06/14/2008 07:08:50 PM · #191 |
reply cut pending L2's approval :)
Message edited by author 2008-06-14 19:09:19. |
|
|
|
06/16/2008 05:00:30 AM · #192 |
Personally, I like his site. Am I a professional? No. Has reading his site helped me to take better pictures? Yes.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I haven't heard of anyone complaining that they bought something they didn't like based on his advice.
The biggest debate about his site seems to be over his statement that "the camera doesn't matter." This statement is meant to help people realize that having a great camera isn't going to make them a great photographer. His mantra has helped me focus on seeing the pictures I can take with what I've got instead of obsessing over the pictures I could take if only I had this $2000 lens. Most websites that review lenses assume that you have decided to buy this lens, but Ken's site questions whether you even need the lens to start with. Since I've started reading his site, I've taken many good pictures (ones that I and friends are happy with) with my D80 and my Cybershot.
It was through reading Ken's site that I discovered Dave Black's site (which is all about the person taking the picture and learning new tricks) and doing a google search on him that I discovered this site (which I joined to help make Ken's case, and to continue to learn about photography.)
I'm not going to suggest those who disapprove of Ken are jealous. That's been done already and I suspect that many here are quite accomplished themselves. I assure you that I'm not a "spam-bot" but I do hope that I learn as much from this site (having now joined) as I have from Ken's. My job is teaching music.
And lastly - to those who complain of biased reporting - I personally like opinions. When people give them and explain their reasons for them I gain a greater understanding of whether the subject, whether it be a movie, hike or a camera, is something I am interested in. Many of the opinions shared here have helped shape the way I see his site now, but many who trash him give no explanation and those that do often show their own bias in doing so or at least show that they have missed the point of his articles. |
|
|
|
06/16/2008 05:37:03 AM · #193 |
|
|
|
06/16/2008 05:45:33 AM · #194 |
Most human-like spambot I've ever read. ;-)
Kidding, mellowguy (too lazy to type your whole username. Hmmm, but not too lazy to type that I am too lazy, I guess.)
Welcome to DPC, we can always use another opinion and this is a great place to learn photography. Just don't take anything seriously. Well, except for serious stuff, but there aint too much of that 'round here.
Dagnabit, viewing the Cowboy challenge results done got me tawkin all funny.
Have fun! |
|
|
|
06/16/2008 12:07:13 PM · #195 |
How about we change the title of this thread to Ken Rockwell- Genius and fool.
There must be something to this guy to keep a thread going for two years. Most of the threads I start are lucky to last an hour. And look at how many new people he has brought to DPC- albeit to post only once.
|
|
|
|
06/16/2008 12:52:08 PM · #196 |
I've been asked to not reply here again because of complaints and I think I agreed not to but that seems unfair to everyone. I'll save my bickering for another time though.
Ken seems to be a very polarizing, people either do love or hate him. I think that is a sign of a strong personality, so that is probably why this thread keeps going.
Sorry L2!
|
|
|
|
06/16/2008 01:31:58 PM · #197 |
Originally posted by togtog:
.....Ken seems to be a very polarizing, people either do love or hate him........ |
Maybe that is his genius. It does seem that in our society polarizing personallities have the abillity to "hang on" much longer than others. People who reflect the opinions of the middle 80% of our society seem to be flashes in the pans, whereas the 20% (10% on either side) that reflect more extremist views seem to constantly resurface.
|
|
|
|
06/16/2008 02:15:39 PM · #198 |
Originally posted by DjFenzl:
I've gotten the impression from some people on here they believe Ken Rockwell (//kenrockwell.com) is a joke. His site and information seems credible enough though.
What do you think and why? |
Don't know much about him. Looks like a goofball to me... |
|
|
|
06/16/2008 02:17:07 PM · #199 |
Originally posted by togtog:
I've been asked to not reply here again because of complaints and I think I agreed not to but that seems unfair to everyone. I'll save my bickering for another time though.
Ken seems to be a very polarizing, people either do love or hate him. I think that is a sign of a strong personality, so that is probably why this thread keeps going.
Sorry L2! |
The only thing that puzzles me is that the man has his own caveat page where he openly admits that everything he states is opinion, that he's frequently wrong, and that it's basically just for fun.
So why do people get so bent out of shape at him in the first place?
|
|
|
|
06/16/2008 02:28:37 PM · #200 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
The only thing that puzzles me is that the man has his own caveat page where he openly admits that everything he states is opinion, that he's frequently wrong, and that it's basically just for fun.
So why do people get so bent out of shape at him in the first place? |
Could be because he has a very strong opinion. More likely it could be because most of his hits come from google direct to his pages and his caveat page is kinda hidden away under the About link at the bottom of the page. So people could view 90% of the site and never see that caveat page, which was true in my case, which is why I was being so pissy.
I still think the caveat should be more clearly placed, would probably clear up a lot.
|
|
