Oh My!...Rockwell's Review on the 70D Locked

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
Cam Jones
Junior MemberPosts: 44Gear list
Re: Oh My!...Rockwell's Review on the 70D
In reply to howardroark, 7 months ago

howardroark wrote:

Cam Jones wrote:

howardroark wrote:

Depth of field advantages from full frame are practically meaningless.

For 80% or more of photographers (meaning, anyone with a camera), this is a basically accurate statement.

80% of people with a camera don't know what depth of field is.

That's why I made that comment. Are you disagreeing with what I said?

80% of cameras don't have much depth of field to speak of in the first place. People in this forum are much more likely to actually care about the details of photography.

Hm, I thought the topic was Ken Rockwell's reviews on his site, specifically his 70D review. As for your statement concerning people on this forum more likely to care about details of photography, that's debatable. Judging from the comments, I think there are as many, if not more, commenters who I would say are not subject matter experts as there are folks who are quite knowledgeable. And I'm not saying that's a bad thing either.

People who don't care buy their 70D without reading much in the way of reviews and probably zero forum posts, put it in Green Square mode, and carry on with their lives. People who come to this forum know better. Should those poor saps do a search for reviews and find his first or come here to get more opinions without anyone talking about what depth of field is good for then I guess they just don't get to make up their mind for themselves, huh? It is not entirely intuitive for people to just figure out on their own the differences in DoF between FF and tiny point and shoot sensors, and in photography every little difference counts.

This is not wikipedia. If DPreview starts including every painful detail about anything and everything, this site will instantly become useless and boring to a lot of readers. I don't come to this site to read about "Lesson 1: Introduction to Photography". I suspect most people come here for photographic equipment reviews and news.

Here's what Ken should say: "If you just want to take pictures and don't give a flying f$%^ about trying to make them look great instead of good, then listen to me. If you don't think that the details make a difference in many shooting situations, output options, and the overall look of your images then here's my advice."

What's with the sarcasm? Instead of imagining what Ken "should say", let's just hear what he actually says (from his "about" page):

"I have a big sense of humor, and do this site to entertain you (and myself), as well as to inform and to educate. I occasionally weave fiction and satire into my stories to keep them interesting. I love a good hoax..... A hoax, like some of the things I do on this website, is done as a goof simply for the heck of it by overactive minds as a practical joke. Even Ansel Adams kidded around when he was just a pup in the 1920s by selling his photos as "Parmelian Prints." I have the energy and sense of humor of a three-year old, so remember, this is a personal website, and never presented as fact. I enjoy making things up for fun, as does The Onion, and I publish them here — even on this page."

 Cam Jones's gear list:Cam Jones's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Nikon D700 Leica M9 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800E +12 more
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow