Home · Register · 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              6       7       end
  

Archive 2008 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann

  
 
James R
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Michael Reichmann was a little off put by a KR article, hence he published a rebuttal.
A good read and a few jabs at fan-boys.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com

Try this address. The article is Your Camera Does Matter.

Edited on Mar 13, 2008 at 07:17 PM



Mar 13, 2008 at 07:10 PM
James R
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


OK, I can't get this to paste, so go to http://www.Luminous-Landscape.com towards the bottom of the page under Selected Recent Highlights.

Now why does this link work?

Edited on Mar 13, 2008 at 07:20 PM



Mar 13, 2008 at 07:19 PM
stompyq
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Good read and a excellent rebuttal. Nicly done


Mar 13, 2008 at 07:34 PM
Jammy Straub
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Oh snaps, I heart Reichmann. It seems slightly out of character for him, but oh well I suppose.

http://luminous-landscape.com/essays/cameras-matter.shtml

The more Ken articles I read over the years the more convinced I am that he is a self feeding PR machine that knows exactly what he's doing writing the sort of fluff he turns out. We talk, people get inflamed, call him stupid, and he gets more web hits and income. Smart boy.

Edited for horrible grammar...

Edited by Jammy Straub on Mar 14, 2008 at 12:42 AM GMT

Edited on Mar 13, 2008 at 07:42 PM



Mar 13, 2008 at 07:35 PM
butchM
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


stompyq wrote:
Good read and a excellent rebuttal. Nicly done


+1

Michael doesn't get riled up often, but when he does he's straight to the point.



Mar 13, 2008 at 07:36 PM
Steve Carlton
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


How much is that R10 gonna be?


Mar 13, 2008 at 07:41 PM
ccarroll05
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Obviously Rockwell's post was a little tongue in cheek and suffered a bit of hyperbole. But Reichman's argument was totally ineffective in rebutting his main thesis- that great pictures can be taken by great photographers using just about any configuration of modern equipment. Oh, you mean you can't expect to use an 8 X 10 view camera to capture the peak action of the winning Super Bowl play? Well, duh!! I think even Rockwell would concede that point.

And of course the fact that the two images he used in his rebuttal could have been taken using just about any camera and medium telephoto lens made by Canon/Nikon/Pentax etc in the past 50 years didn't exactly bolster his argument.



Mar 13, 2008 at 07:41 PM
Marc Kurth
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Jammy Straub wrote:
................The more time over the years years that I read anything Ken writes the more convinced I am that he is a self feeding PR machine that knows exactly what he's doing writing the sort of fluff he turns out. We talk, people get inflamed, call him stupid, and he gets more web hits and income. Smart boy.

Edited by Jammy Straub on Mar 14, 2008 at 12:37 AM GMT


Right on the money Jammy - and very well said. I'm willing to bet that KR is grinning while thinking "I did it again, and they keep on falling for it, over and over again".........

Marc



Mar 13, 2008 at 07:42 PM
Spencer_Fu
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


ccarroll05 wrote:
Obviously Rockwell's post was a little tongue in cheek and suffered a bit of hyperbole. But Reichman's argument was totally ineffective in rebutting his main thesis- that great pictures can be taken by great photographers using just about any configuration of modern equipment. Oh, you mean you can't expect to use an 8 X 10 view camera to capture the peak action of the winning Super Bowl play? Well, duh!! I think even Rockwell would concede that point.

And of course the fact that the two images he used in his rebuttal could have been taken using just about any camera
...Show more

I disagree with Ken Rockwell a lot .. but this is one article I DO agree on. Cameras and lenses have got to a point where they are all great tools for photography. I have seen rich people playing with the Nikon D300 and not knowing how to change their ISO's ... while I am still using an ANCIENT Nikon D1x from 2001. I think this rebuttal isn't effective at all.

I mean .. sure it would be nice to have ISO 25000 and 11 FPS. But JUST because I have crazy technical features doesn't mean I can take a good photo. Hand me a decent camera from the last decade and I can probably take a better photo of a new amateur with a D3 or 1D MK III any day.



Mar 13, 2008 at 08:04 PM
Dan1
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


One of the purposes of Rockwell's website is as an experiment in how people passively recieve information that is given to them by authoritative figures/media. The about section of his site http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm mentions this, and he alludes to it throughout varies items on his site; "I'm most comfortable when people call me an idiot. It means I'm making people think."


Mar 13, 2008 at 08:04 PM
cencored
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


I just saw MR in Sydney when he came here on his tour and I had a long talk with him. He is a very reasonable and contempt person, I was almost surprised when I read his rebuttal, but quite agree with him, like often.

Still I need to admit that there are some photos I find absolutely amazing even though they may be 100 years old and gear was pathetic in those days...

Gear does matter though and I think it is one of our favorite past times to talk about it.



Mar 13, 2008 at 08:07 PM
harvey steeves
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


after reading the rebuttal, I find myself somewhat disagreeing with MR. Whether you consider a photographer to an artist or a craftsman, a good one can produce regardless of the tools they are using. A good sports shooter can get you a good shot if they are using a 10fps dslr or a 1 fph 4x5 - its simply knowing the subject. If MR can only produce snapshots using a Holga, others can produce statements. If you truly want to produce, you adapt to the tools you are provide with.


Mar 13, 2008 at 08:11 PM
r_o_b_s_o_n
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


To be honest, both are correct, and both are blind. You need both the creativity, and the tools.


Mar 13, 2008 at 08:13 PM
Grognard
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Ken Rockwell is geared towards the newbies, and the casual photographer, so cut him some slack, look at the demographic he is targeting.


Mar 13, 2008 at 08:29 PM
Numfar
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


All MR is arguing is that discussing the merrits of gear (all gear, not just the newest Canon dSLR vs. the newest Nikon dSLR) remains relevent, b/c they are different, and over time, improvements will permit increased range of possibilities.

This is certainly relevant when someone asks, for example, for a comparison between the Olympus E3 and the Canon 5D. What the camera will be used for is hugely relevent, and in a wet, dirty environment high up rain-forest mountain, one might very much wish for the tough E3 and be more than willing to put up with the relatively low ISO 400 or 800 limit of usable images, and cropped sensor. The 5D could well die early and hard in such an environment. On the other hand, if making a cover shot for your local restaurant magazine, the 5D would be a much better choice, being able to shoot a nice atmospheric shot at ISO 1600, with a much wider field of view.

Anyway, that is what MR is saying - there are still specific tools with relative strengths and weaknesses, and to suggest (as some do) that it's *all* about the phototrapher, is fundamentally wrong. Gear is relevant.

B



Mar 13, 2008 at 08:34 PM
Numfar
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Grognard wrote:
Ken Rockwell is geared towards the newbies, and the casual photographer, so cut him some slack, look at the demographic he is targeting.



It seems to me that Ken Rockwell is geared toward Ken Rockwell.



Mar 13, 2008 at 08:35 PM
poisonpill
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


As with almost everything else in life, the truth lies somewhere in between. Yes the gear does matter, but CURRENTLY the base Canon/Nikons etc should all be good enough for you to take quality photos with.

Let's face it, most (if not all) people are ask the "what should I get?" question are basic users who would not understand the benefits of a D3 over a D300 or a D80 over a D60. I know it's tempting to buy "the best" and grow into it, but I don't agree with that practice. Personally I believe it's best to learn to drive with a crappy car, and learn photography with something that's simpler.

All I'm saying that based upon the excellent camera choices that are out there now and the type of photographer that is asking the question... the camera really kinda doesn't matter.



Mar 13, 2008 at 08:52 PM
bellyface
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Awesome! Good read definitely!


Mar 13, 2008 at 08:57 PM
butchM
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Yes, both Ken and Michael are right .... and wrong. Could a world renowned photographer create a decent portfolio with a Mavica and a pocket full of floppy discs? Sure they could. Just wouldn't want to print them 24x36 though. Would the same famous photographer use less than stellar gear for his daily work? Nope. Nada. Absolutely not.

Edited on Mar 13, 2008 at 09:41 PM



Mar 13, 2008 at 09:39 PM
Elan II
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Ken Rockwell Rebuttal by Reichmann


Looks like some folks are absent today, so I'm going to fill in with one of the typical replies..

"Ken Rockwell is such an idiot, and he's stupid too! Everything he says, I do the exact opposite! Thats' the only way I can be guaranteed to be a great photographer. So if he says never use a tripod, I ALWAYS use a tripod. And if he says press the shutter release, I PULL the shutter release. And if he says look through the viewfinder, I drill a hole on the other side of the camera and look through there and ONLY there! In fact, I am so superior that I don't even read his site. I have a person on my payroll that does that for me and then tells me what the stupid idiot Rockwell does, so I can do the EXACT opposite!!"


Pretty close? Anyway, Jammy has this right.



Mar 13, 2008 at 10:10 PM
1
       2       3              6       7       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              6       7       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.