Ken Rockwell's review of the D7100

Started Feb 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
eddyshoots
Senior MemberPosts: 2,174
Like?
Re: Oh my, you really stepped in it ...
In reply to Sammy Yousef, Feb 26, 2013

Sammy Yousef wrote:

eddyshoots wrote:

Here we have a similar situation. Everyone in their right mind looks at what was written on Rockwell's site and sees that it was some poor editing on his part.

People are going to base buying decisions on that poor editing.

Yes, he should fix that particular line. However, as I said in an earlier post, the warning is valid. Some third party lenses on occasion will not work with newer models. It happened with me and my 50-500. The auto-focus didn't work on my DSLR yet did work just fine on the seller's F90. I did a little research and found out that this is a common problem and that Sigma will try to fix the lens for just a nominal charge of $10. I was pleased with Sigma's response to the problem but the reality is that Nikon does not share the camera/lens communication coding with these third party manufacturers. Companies like Sigma are forced to reverse engineer all of their lens communication coding. When Nikon makes a change for a new model then Sigma is left with partially inoperative lenses. Ken's overall warning was valid. But yes, he should get that old reference changed. The longer it stays on his blog the more he is validating your argument.

Those that see only red when they think of Ken Rockwell, take this out of context suggesting that he's a liar or some other nonsense.

He doesn't need to be a liar to do harm. He doesn't even need to intend to do harm.

It's a symptom of our world's current friend or enemy mentality.

I don't know the guy personally. I don't want to befriend him or make an enemy out of him. I just want him to stop writing friendly but easily falsifiable drivel.

What does he falsify? Good grief. This is the leap that astounds me. Opinions are one thing, but the constant unsubstantiated accusations of falsehood get ridiculous. I've read through the entire review/preview in question and it's standard stuff about frame-rates and viewfinders. At the end he mentions that he's already ordered his and then suggests some lens and flash options to go with it.

For many here, because Ken Rockwell's opinions disagree with their opinions then he must be stopped (things like JPEG vs. RAW, tripod vs. no tripod, small vs. large, realistic color vs. saturated ). And as showcased here, if stopping him requires a few things to be purposefully taken out of context then so be it. It is indeed a sad state

There are lots of people with opinions other than mine, plenty I don't disagree with. No problem with that or with them. The issue I have is that KR does not provide a balanced view - he provides an extreme over-simplified one without mentioning the drawbacks.

For example RAW vs JPEG (and smaller file size at that) - there are good reasons to shoot one or the other. He resorts to name calling (Measurebator anyone?) whenever people don't agree with his extreme view that RAW is a complete waste. Yet any experienced photographer knows that if you move beyond snapshots of the kids, there are good reasons to shoot RAW. The issue I take with that is that the new photographers he targets as his audience DON'T have the knowledge to understand that there are good reasons. It discourages them from trying RAW shooting or considering it in certain situations. In other words if you believe KR or anyone else that states their opinions as facts there is a real danger that your growth as a photographer will be stifled. And the very people who he takes as his target audience are the ones who want shortcuts and won't know better and therefore won't look elsewhere for counter-examples.

Did a quick Ken Rockwell RAW search and here's what he says (edited down for space):

#If you have to ask: shoot JPEG. ....... Fair enough, even Nikon makes this the default setting.

#If you shoot thousands of shots a day: shoot JPEG. ........ That's what I do when I shoot a kid's baseball game. Set my WB to daylight and shoot away.

#If you love to tweak your images one-by one and shoot less than about a hundred shots at a time than raw could be for you. ....... Reasonable.

He then goes on to give some tips on how to shoot JPEG and how to shoot RAW. Again like my election example above. What he actually says and what people accuse him of saying are often very different.

I sometimes wonder if his detractors actual read his blog or just read what other detractors tell them he says. As I always say with these Ken Rockwell threads....there is a lot of Ken Rockwell's opinion based writings that I really disagree with (Sammy....you know how I feel about the SB400 ) but I'm not able to make that leap that he's somehow dangerous or a liar. I'd say he's generally a good resource for a new user. I'd hope that more advanced users would be able to progress beyond a Rockwell centric universe but if they are unable to do even that then they have bigger problems than listening to Ken Rockwell.

-- 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