Ken Rockwell's review of the D7100

Started Feb 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
eddyshoots
Senior MemberPosts: 2,174
Like?
Re: Why Ken Rockwell gets Denigrated.
In reply to Guidenet, Feb 25, 2013

Guidenet wrote:

Eddy you're being rude and extemely mean spirited. If you can't discuss things like this in a polite way, I certainly don't think you need to be responded to. You can be a KR groupie if you choose. Go ahead and take his links and pay him his five dollars as you will.

I stand by my history, neither rude or mean spirited. I called you out on the magical professional photography club crap you were getting into in this thread. If it bothered you....well so be it. Professional or amateur status has little or no bearing on the ability to put forth reviews, previews, lessons, musings or anything else on a blog website. Reading between the lines of your posts, I see a very clear "be a pro or shut up" attitude that I do not like.

As far as whether or not I make a living as a photographer, I need prove that to nobody other than my employer who cuts my check.

I didn't ask about your professional status nor do I care. I implied that any professional photographer who "resents" an amateur blogger can't be much of a professional photographer. I still think so. Perhaps I should have suggested that any professional photographer that "resents" an amateur blogger needs to grow a thicker crust. I'm plenty crusty and I know that amateurs do not threaten me in my chosen profession.

As far as what a wedding photographer uses day to day, you also seem not to really know. I don't care to argue that either, as you must not be one. If a wedding photographer had to use a 70-200 for most of the event, he or she would be quite tired and probably will have missed many of the shots. I'm not sure I'd even bring one to a wedding anymore.

I'll concede this point about wedding photography. I later found a Canon website poll that suggests that the 70-200 is second to the 24-70 in wedding photography use. And I'll concede that the 24-70 would fall solidly in the middle of normal.

The main point is that you're neither rational nor polite in your condemnation of those who think KR is not a credible spokesman for photographers. That's just too bad. Wallow in it. Be his buddy if you wish. I don't really care. Neither do most others here I would expect. Rant on. SMH

OK.

However, as I state above. I stand by my history. I can hardly be accused of being irrational. I never name call nor do I ever denigrate another photographer's quality of photography....ever (which by the way, you did of Ken Rockwell in a previous post....something which I do consider to be very rude). I'm not overly polite, but I don't think I'm particularly rude. And finally as for ranting....I'll save that for the bar.

-- hide signature --

eddyshoots

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Heh.New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow