Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
  

Where does Ken Rockwell get his lens sale figures?
  
 
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Where does Ken Rockwell get his lens sale figures?


All these on-line forums and blogs. They're just magazines. They are not peer reviewed journals by any stretch. There's Mad Magazine and there's Cosmopolitan. There's something for everyone. If you go to someone's house and there's a Road & Track or Motorcyclist on the table does it really mean anything? We have Outdoor Photographer, and there are plenty of landscape photographers who think it's junk. Personally, what I learned a long time ago in graduate school was read, and read everything... Read anything that interests you and sort it out yourself. When you've finally read enough from different sources, then you can make a determination as to usefulness.

Edited on Mar 24, 2017 at 09:02 PM · View previous versions



Mar 24, 2017 at 02:25 PM
binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Where does Ken Rockwell get his lens sale figures?


JohnK007 wrote:
Can you honestly name a Nikon resource, other than MIR, that has more reviews on old Nikon glass than Ken's? I'll bet that you can't. I do agree there are better write-ups on particular items, which I appreciate also, but such authors always have comparatively few articles to offer. Again, no one (other than MIR) has a more complete database of articles, photographs, opinions, and history for each item.

I also disagree with you that Ken's reviews are "full of errors." Of course, there will always be "some" errors on any huge effort or compilation like that, but it's ridiculous to
...Show more

First off, your whole premise is ridiculous. Not having personally cultivated a large Nikon site doesn't mean someone is not entitled to their own opinion about Ken Rockwell.

Second, here's my problem with Ken: you know the phrase, "a few bad apples spoils the barrel"? My issue with him is that, as M635_Guy found, he has a not-insignificant amount of objectively incorrect information on his site that he doesn't seem to be inclined to fix or care about. He also has a good chunk of total speculation that is presented with enough authority and firmness to where it could be interpreted as being meaningful.

When you present yourself as an authority, yet demonstrate that you're completely willing to ignore facts, refuse to recant when you're provably wrong, push narratives that are incompletely presented and badly reasoned, and engage in wild speculation that is presented right alongside your reviews as if they had some kind of basis in reality... you've rather significantly hurt your credibility. If my GPS took me to Omaha, Nebraska one out of every ten times I jumped in the car, I'd cease to trust it, even though it's a dramatic minority of the time.

I admire his ability to make a living off his website. I don't hate him. I just think his site and his opinion needs to be taken with enough salt that it's not really worth referencing or looking at.



Mar 24, 2017 at 02:25 PM
LeifG
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Where does Ken Rockwell get his lens sale figures?


binary visions wrote:
First off, your whole premise is ridiculous. Not having personally cultivated a large Nikon site doesn't mean someone is not entitled to their own opinion about Ken Rockwell.

Second, here's my problem with Ken: you know the phrase, "a few bad apples spoils the barrel"? My issue with him is that, as M635_Guy found, he has a not-insignificant amount of objectively incorrect information on his site that he doesn't seem to be inclined to fix or care about. He also has a good chunk of total speculation that is presented with enough authority and firmness to where it could be
...Show more

I agree completely. I respect his ability to earn a very good living from his web site, but I despise his pandering to the lowest common denominator, his deliberate posting of outrageous statements to generate web traffic - known as click bait - his claiming to be an expert and yet most of his qualitative statements are highly opinionated, and quite often eccentric if not downright wrong. He knows that he needs web traffic, and to do that he attracts the average Joe/Josephine, people who want direct to the point advice. They want to find an expert, and Ken is not scared to regularly claim to be an expert. It is a site for the inexperienced, and those with poor critical skills. It is a photo site written by an expert on marketing, not a photographer. Of course it is not so different from many photo magazines, but it is not edited, peer reviewed, or independently checked. It is the views of one very eccentric person. Generally I don't make negative comments about pwrsonal web sites, but Ken is such a loud mouthed egotist that I am happy to describe it as trash, pap, garbage. There are so many skilled photographers out there who gve their time to help others. Ken is out to earn a living, so he is open to criticism, and his boastful manner combined with often utter ignorance of many forms of photography and his lack of shyness in claiming to be an expert make him fair game.



Mar 24, 2017 at 08:41 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



M635_Guy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Where does Ken Rockwell get his lens sale figures?


Y'all are making the point better than I did.


Mar 25, 2017 at 03:47 PM
JohnK007
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Where does Ken Rockwell get his lens sale figures?


binary visions wrote:
First off, your whole premise is ridiculous. Not having personally cultivated a large Nikon site doesn't mean someone is not entitled to their own opinion about Ken Rockwell.


Your criticism is what's ridiculous. As was the other fellow's claim Ken "didn't care" about Nikon gear. I used the decades of time/effort Ken has put his site together as proof Ken does care, which pretty much clears the air IMO. This is not to suggest others can't have an opinion about him, but to dismiss that kind of effort over a few childish grievances with his "style" is what's ridiculous IMO.



binary visions wrote:
Second, here's my problem with Ken: you know the phrase, "a few bad apples spoils the barrel"? My issue with him is that, as M635_Guy found, he has a not-insignificant amount of objectively incorrect information on his site that he doesn't seem to be inclined to fix or care about. He also has a good chunk of total speculation that is presented with enough authority and firmness to where it could be interpreted as being meaningful.


I have seen a few instances of this, but I just reject the information. It's not "a few bad apples," it's realizing one must discard a certain amount of chaff to get to the grain.



binary visions wrote:
When you present yourself as an authority, yet demonstrate that you're completely willing to ignore facts, refuse to recant when you're provably wrong, push narratives that are incompletely presented and badly reasoned, and engage in wild speculation that is presented right alongside your reviews as if they had some kind of basis in reality... you've rather significantly hurt your credibility. If my GPS took me to Omaha, Nebraska one out of every ten times I jumped in the car, I'd cease to trust it, even though it's a dramatic minority of the time.


If someone emails Ken to "prove him wrong," and he doesn't jump up and make the correction, it might just mean he doesn't have the time, or inclination, to handle every trivial contact/request he gets.

For you to compare making a several-thousand-mile detour, and the hours/time/mileage/gas expense thereby, to having some details wrong on a website is about as "badly reasoned" and full of "wild speculation" as it gets. It's pretty ironic you can't see just how guilty you are of the very accusation you have made ...



binary visions wrote:
I admire his ability to make a living off his website. I don't hate him. I just think his site and his opinion needs to be taken with enough salt that it's not really worth referencing or looking at.


It's pretty simple: Ken has put a lot of time and effort into creating a resource. He has a lot of drive and dedication to keep that effort going for so long.

Is he fallible? Yes.
Does he come off like a zealot at times? Yes.
But one has to be a zealot of sorts to put something together like that.

I am also aware he tries to stir the pot a bit, yes again. Of course it's because he is trying to make a living off of it. He wants to be talked about ... and here you are, and here I am, talking about it ... so it looks like his plan is working.

I take what *everyone* says with a grain of salt. I also know how to distinguish his authentic reviews (where he's actually owned and used the item) and those on which he is merely speculating. I can say for sure has been spot-on on those items that I have owned and so have a reference point.

No I don't know Ken. Have never emailed him. I just see his name, and a lot of work, every time I Google a Nikon product, right alongside MIR. And I will always respect that kind of sustained effort over "critical boo-hoos," every time.

My last $0.02



Mar 25, 2017 at 10:22 PM
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Where does Ken Rockwell get his lens sale figures?


Look I'm no Rockwell defender but this is an instance (and not the only instance, I must acknowledge) where Rockwell is giving us real information. In the third post Joseph pointed out his likely source (which, as a Nikon lens geek, is one of my favorite sites).

So I'm not sure we needed two pages of ire this time just because his name was mentioned.



Mar 26, 2017 at 01:34 AM
1       2      
3
       end






FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password