Interesting Sennheiser HD 800 Review by Ken Rockwell
Jan 9, 2011 at 12:19 PM Post #31 of 51
His photo reviews arent any good, he just uses the same description for almost every lens.... He called the 18-55 Nikon VR2 "Sharp" -__-" 

" I also wouldn't quote Ken Rockwell, because he's known for testing cameras by reading the specs and, get this, imagining how they would perform based on the specs and not actual hands on testing. Beware of any one who quotes Ken Rockwell."
 
Jan 9, 2011 at 12:26 PM Post #32 of 51

I'm going to have to agree with this.  The website shows meticulous sentence structure.  This 1 post guy, not so much.
 
 
Quote:
sparker said:
I don't think that's Ken Rockwell. Sounds more like a poorly implemented troll to me. The spelling and the grammar are both distinctly different from his website's spelling and grammar.
Click to expand...



 
Jan 9, 2011 at 1:34 PM Post #33 of 51

 
Quote:
vincenthifi said:
His photo reviews arent any good, he just uses the same description for almost every lens.... He called the 18-55 Nikon VR2 "Sharp" -__-" 

" I also wouldn't quote Ken Rockwell, because he's known for testing cameras by reading the specs and, get this, imagining how they would perform based on the specs and not actual hands on testing. Beware of any one who quotes Ken Rockwell."
Click to expand...


so you're saying the nikon 18-55mm "isn't" sharp?  so i guess those guys on interfacelift were just making up stuff?
 
from what i can see from his site he clearly makes a distinction between his "guesses" and what he has in hand.  the cameras he's tested personally seems to have some of his own photos in them.
 
Jan 9, 2011 at 2:49 PM Post #35 of 51
Quote:
sugarkang said:
I'm going to have to agree with this.  The website shows meticulous sentence structure.  This 1 post guy, not so much.
 
 
Quote:
sparker said:
I don't think that's Ken Rockwell. Sounds more like a poorly implemented troll to me. The spelling and the grammar are both distinctly different from his website's spelling and grammar.
Click to expand...


 
Click to expand...



Yeah, that was sort of what my last line meant. But if an Edition 8 review shows up, I stand corrected.
 
Jan 9, 2011 at 3:15 PM Post #38 of 51
Quote:
sugarkang said:
Who knows though.  It could just as easily be explained by an English major wife proofreading his website. 
Click to expand...


Didn't he used to be an editor at a newspaper, and all sorts of other media positions? I suspect that he can type a legible and grammatically correct sentence - at least as much of one as I can, at any rate.
 
We could send a mass-mailing to his website beseeching him to join us; if he accepts, we'll know the other guy is a fake. If he tells us that he's already here, we'll know nothing. And if he ignores us, we'll know something completely different.
 
(That wasn't serious)
 
Jan 9, 2011 at 3:17 PM Post #39 of 51
Ken is as legit as any photog. He speaks the truth, but does over emphasizes his points, which is the reason people don't like him. I bought a D40 because of Ken and still use it today. Not because I can't upgrade to a D7000, but because there is no reason to. I don't visit his site very much anymore because I have all the gear I need, but show me one thing Ken has said that is not accurate. Opinions aside.
 
That is not the real Ken.
 
Jan 9, 2011 at 9:21 PM Post #40 of 51
I particularly liked this:
 
 
Quote:
 Even if you've dropped a few hundred grand into audio equipment, there is still no way to reproduce exactly the sound of a live symphony orchestra. You have to be there, which is why I'd much rather go to a concert than listen at home.
Click to expand...

 
Sort of puts all the 'audiophile' wankery into perspective. 
 
 
Jan 10, 2011 at 12:48 AM Post #42 of 51


Quote:
slaughter said:
Ken is as legit as any photog. He speaks the truth, but does over emphasizes his points, which is the reason people don't like him. I bought a D40 because of Ken and still use it today. Not because I can't upgrade to a D7000, but because there is no reason to. I don't visit his site very much anymore because I have all the gear I need, but show me one thing Ken has said that is not accurate. Opinions aside.
 
That is not the real Ken.
Click to expand...



you should see people in photography forums.  it's like mass ken rockwell hate.  on the other hand, some of the best photographers in the world give him shoutouts on their websites.  makes you wonder huh?  :p
 
Jan 10, 2011 at 2:17 AM Post #43 of 51
It probably has to do with circles of power.  If it's a fan / photographer relationship, there's no penalty for hating because the fan is a consumer.  But when it's other photographers involved, even if there's hate, it's probably a lot more measured because they are potential business relationships. 
 
Quote:
ihascake said:
you should see people in photography forums.  it's like mass ken rockwell hate.  on the other hand, some of the best photographers in the world give him shoutouts on their websites.  makes you wonder huh?  :p
Click to expand...



 
Jan 10, 2011 at 2:28 AM Post #44 of 51
Ken Rockwell? The same Ken Rockwell whose recycle bin doubles as National Geographic's cover photo repository? Did you know that he owns a very special left handed Nikon? Check out his homepage. 
 
He's definitely entertaining and he's quite accomplished, but outside of photography his knowledge isn't great.
 
 
Jan 10, 2011 at 3:56 AM Post #45 of 51
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top