To quote KR regarding his review of the 18mm, "I have no idea why it's so bad, but it is."
Gee, I think that the one who doesn't use any real, solid evidence to back up anything is your hero KR! Is this sample good enough, or do you really want me to go through all of his "reviews" and provide even more evidence?
Let's save everyone here the headache of having to read his comedy sketch reviews. Again, you make your lens buying decissions your way, I will do them mine.
p.s. You can further show your support of KR by donating funds to his website if you haven't done so already! ...Show more →
In Kenny-boy's defence, you're misinterpreting him. He's just expressing wonder that a modern lens design could be as bad a performer as the 18/2.8D is. He notes his major beef with it is flare.
The internet is full of people with opinions without validation. Why would anyone trust one opinion in this venue that is the internet. KR has some interesting opinions, and actually, if you decide not to flame for a minute, has some exhaustive comparisons (as well as an ample dose of BS and self-promotion). He is one source among many that have been mentioned above, which I actually value more highly, like Hogan, Rorslett and Black, to name a few.
I find little use for the flaming comments, and actually value with the few above that have risen above the BS and made comments. From the 25 or so lenses I have had, KR's list is not that far off. What I do appreciate is that it has many people thinking and commenting, for we all have our different experiences. I have benefited from those posts.
But then again, it is easier to drag something through the mud than intelligently comment about it.
My 2 cents....
Terry
(just joined this forum, hopefully not a mistake)
tdtaylor wrote:
The internet is full of people with opinions without validation. Why would anyone trust one opinion in this venue that is the internet. KR has some interesting opinions, and actually, if you decide not to flame for a minute, has some exhaustive comparisons (as well as an ample dose of BS and self-promotion). He is one source among many that have been mentioned above, which I actually value more highly, like Hogan, Rorslett and Black, to name a few.
I find little use for the flaming comments, and actually value with the few above that have risen above the BS and made comments. From the 25 or so lenses I have had, KR's list is not that far off. What I do appreciate is that it has many people thinking and commenting, for we all have our different experiences. I have benefited from those posts.
But then again, it is easier to drag something through the mud than intelligently comment about it.
My 2 cents....
Terry
(just joined this forum, hopefully not a mistake)...Show more →
Ken R is not held in high regard on this forum by many knowledgeable photographers. You might want to get a feel for the forum and its members before lecturing. Just my 2 cents.
James R wrote:
And why would I want to take advice from you or other forum addicts who have nothing to do but criticise KR`s opinions and belittle him?
Exactly what is your claim to fame?
John
uccmmcpo wrote:
And why would I want to take advice from you or other forum addicts who have nothing to do but criticise KR`s opinions and belittle him?
Exactly what is your claim to fame?
John
Did I criticize or belittle KR? I believe earlier on I said KR has a niche on the internet and many like his reviews. BTW, can opinions only be made by those who have verified "claims to fame?" Didn't read that when I join FM.
James R wrote:
Ken R is not held in high regard on this forum by many knowledgeable photographers. You might want to get a feel for the forum and its members before lecturing. Just my 2 cents.
My take on this that it is a loosing battle. Too many KR fanatics who can see no wrong with anything he writes. No matter how you try to reason, they seem to be set in theirs ways.
I do have a suggesttion though, since there are so many KR fans here at FM, I believe he should have is own sub fourm here. That way all who love his work and take it to be gospel can enjoy his rantings. This would leave space for the rest of us who want to simply speak with common people who use these lenses daily.
James R wrote:
Did I criticize or belittle KR? I believe earlier on I said KR has a niche on the internet and many like his reviews. BTW, can opinions only be made by those who have verified "claims to fame?" Didn't read that when I join FM.
Bah James, you don't have to hide that the "R" stands for "Rockwell" in your name. You are his long lost brother, James Rockwell!
I do have a suggesttion though, since there are so many KR fans here at FM, I believe he should have is own sub fourm here. That way all who love his work and take it to be gospel can enjoy his rantings. This would leave space for the rest of us who want to simply speak with common people who use these lenses daily.
Or we could just not bring up his stuff here . Most of these threads start from the haters based on some limited searching. Don't know how they know all the stuff on this site . Me, I hit a garbage site, it is quickly changed out never to be hit on again...
Ultimately its his site, his money and his time. My fave lens didn't make the list either. Does he suck for not listing it. No, Its his list to his tastes. I am noticing photographers are like executive chefs, get more than 1 in a kitchen and someone is always doing something wrong...
Not A KR liker or a hater. Like all internet sources, the grains of salt are standing by. Some useful stuff there, some junk. Just like all over the internet. I still give him the attaboy to putting up a site in a realm where subjectivity is rampant and no matter what you put up (pic, review, etc) someone gonna is gonna find fault with it.
Edited by hidden_Markov on Jul 23, 2008 at 01:12 PM GMT
gugs wrote:
I would have put the 28-80G on the worst lenses list. Other than that I can agree with some of his choices, but he definitely forgot a few much better lenses...
my list would be (the best ones, I am not too interested in the worst ones) - among the ones I am using
50 1.4 (over the 50 1.8)
14-24
70-200VR (even with the recently discussed issues)
200-400VR
105 2.5
85 1.4
35 1.4
50 1.2
18-200VR
18-70
and among those I have tested but don't own
200VR2.0
300VR2.8
Guy
no 24-70? thats one of Nikons sharpest and nicest lenses!
I definitely agree with you that the 200-400VR should be on the list. After ten of thousands of photos with mine, I still love it as much as the day I opened the box.
snegron wrote:
My take on this that it is a loosing battle. Too many KR fanatics who can see no wrong with anything he writes. No matter how you try to reason, they seem to be set in theirs ways.
This is a two way street geezer. There are so many people here who go all jihadi at the sight of the initials KR that it is impossible to discuss anything he says retionally. I mean you have already shown your bias in selectively quoting something KR said, and completely missing the context of that quote at the same time.
I do have a suggesttion though, since there are so many KR fans here at FM, I believe he should have is own sub fourm here. That way all who love his work and take it to be gospel can enjoy his rantings. This would leave space for the rest of us who want to simply speak with common people who use these lenses daily.
Again, KR has his opinion which doesnt make him any more right or wrong then you. What you are in essence saying is that you only want people here who think the same way as you and EVERYONE else can go away.
I think you will find, if thats the case, that this place would be very, VERY quiet.
MailmanNZ wrote:
This is a two way street geezer. There are so many people here who go all jihadi at the sight of the initials KR that it is impossible to discuss anything he says retionally. I mean you have already shown your bias in selectively quoting something KR said, and completely missing the context of that quote at the same time.
Again, KR has his opinion which doesnt make him any more right or wrong then you. What you are in essence saying is that you only want people here who think the same way as you and EVERYONE else can go away.
I think you will find, if thats the case, that this place would be very, VERY quiet.
Gee, thanks for the insult. Calling me "geezer" was uncalled for, but it does demonstrate that you obviously don't have the maturity to engage in adult conversation without casting childish insults. On the flip side, it does strengthen my point that not only is KR's writing nonsense, but inexperienced little know it alls are the only ones who spew his nonsense as actual fact.
I will try not to further damper your image of the "almighty and all-knowing KR", but I will continue to listen to others here who contribute meaningful reviews and offer first hand knowledge of Nikon products. Oh, and look at the multiple posts to this thread. It appears that the majority of the people here agree with me that KR is not a trusted source. For some unkown reason you have chosen to snip at me. Did I hit a nerve? Should I say how knowledgeable and wonderful KR is in order to please you? Sorry kid, it ain't gonna happen!
People rip Rockwell because he's too honest about gear. If you just spent $5,000 on lenses, his site is not the one to visit for validation.
I don't think his portfolio is incredible, but a lot of what he says about camera gear is very accurate. He understands that when the non-photographer (95%+ of us) sees an image, he or she could care less about the device used to capture it. His site is focused on helping individuals capture images without the need to refinance their home to pay for it.
People who are serious, professional photographers KNOW what they need and Rockwell knows they aren't reading his site. They aren't wasting time deciding between D3s or D700s or D300s. If they shoot Nikon and need a new camera, they get one. If they want a new lens, they get the one they know they need. Reviews are useless to these individuals because they know Nikon is as good as anything else and that the instrument has nothing to do with the result.
Rockwell doesn't pretend to write his site for professionals, so what's the big deal? If you're already a super-photographer, why do you read his site for reviews and technique tips? If you're just starting out, there's nothing wrong with what he says. The simple fact is that most people would be better off and would have more fun with photography with a simple camera like the D40/D60 than with the D700 or D3. Most people would be much happier with the 18-200VR than with 3 lenses covering the same range. Those are the people he writes for.
Yup , KR is controversial but the insults thrown out at him from some of the supposedly knowledgeable Nikon forum gentlemen here sure doesn`t make them look too good in the credibility dept. either.
They had ought to be ashamed of themselves for stooping to the levels usually associated with those who would attempt to make themselves look better by denigrating / besmirching someone elses reputation.
KR is what he is, an overly opinionated professional shooter and writer not much different than the others but in his style. It works good for him and those who know more can usually read between the lines he writes and still enjoy the gist of it.
When those particular critics or any one else get to the point where they get to be as well known as he is or receive as many hits as his site does then maybe they get some wiggle room too but until then they might just want to stop acting like they are superior and more knowledgeable than they really are. This kind of stuff might fly on Dpreview but isn`t the FM forums supposed to be a step up?
.John
Edited by uccmmcpo on Jul 24, 2008 at 01:52 PM GMT
I am going to make this as simple as possible so as no one else misunderstands any of my comments.
If someone here on FM has used a particular lens for more than a month and he or she has something positive or negative to say, then I will love to here it. I value (key word here people, VALUE) the opinion of people here at FM who can give an opinion on a lens after they have used it for at least a month or more.
Is that ureasonable in any way? Am I unreasonable because I simply stated that I will value more the opinion of people here on FM who have had actual working experience with a lens instead of taking as gospel the "review" of KR who has admititdly reviewed and given his opinion on lenses, some of which he never used?
I guess that many who spend too much time in DP Review have adopted those pesky little habits of critisizing what others post but never really posting anything here of any benifit to the FM community!
Meanwhile, Ken just laughs his way merrily to the bank, chuckling inwardly at those people on FM who think they are changing something. Good show, FMers.
I just thinks its funny having looked over the best/worst list again and picking up a half serious note, half just playing around and people are up in arms. Which is what a best/worst list should be in my opinion, something not too serious since there can never be a definitive top 10 list. The fact neither list is 10 and he makes jokes about it should be the other clue. Some people taking this list way to serious for what it is.
As brought up this style fills a niche. Someone like me starting out, he's got some good tidbits that don't require googling every other word to see what they mean since photography has a language all its own. Not lazy, but sometimes don't want to get a technical class over lunch break either and save that for the evening reads Or he'll pick out a lens, says it has aberations in the corner, then turn around and say its gonna get cropped or should be worried about putting the main focus of the picture out of the corners anyway and chalk it up as a fun lens worth buying especially if it has a good price or build quality. If shooting professionally where those corners can mean alot, that may be bad advice. But if you have reached that level, chances are you aren't going there to help pick out out your money making lens either.
. Most of these threads start from the haters based on some limited searching. Don't know how they know all the stuff on this site . Me, I hit a garbage site, it is quickly changed out never to be hit on again...
