Ken Rockwell's business is to make money on his blog. He's stated that his blog is his full time job multiple times. The best way to do this on a blog is with nuggets of truth, but use hyperbole and over generalization to 1) confuse and strongly appeal to those who think the same say and simultaneously 2) aggravate a second set of people who know better. The very fact that he's talked about on the multiple forums I visit makes him a success. What he knows about photography is secondary.
thedigitalbean wrote:
In this case Ken Rockwell doesn't know what he is talking about.
It is a well known fact that he very rarely knows what he is talking about. By his own admission the site contains fantasy information, speculation and whatever else. Just check how many lenses he has "reviewed" and then half down it says things like "I never bought one because my so-and-so lens is good for me".
And everybody knows that KR is the Chuck Norris of photography (just google it).
panos.v wrote:
It is a well known fact that he very rarely knows what he is talking about. By his own admission the site contains fantasy information, speculation and whatever else. Just check how many lenses he has "reviewed" and then half down it says things like "I never bought one because my so-and-so lens is good for me".
And everybody knows that KR is the Chuck Norris of photography (just google it).
. Oh believe me, I have a very low opinion of KR, I was just trying to be nice by saying 'in this case'.
Max ISO used is 640. Looks incredibly clean though.
All the shots taken in RAW and developed in DPP.
The biggest difference I see between the shots and DPreview is the photographer. Look at the good cat photo (Did I really just say "good cat photo"?) The subject is correctly exposed. The light is used correctly. What the heck is that dpreview guy doing.
But perhaps also the jpg engine on the 50D isn't very good. We'll need to watch that.
The big files look nicely detailed. Even to the point of showing lens flaws, I think. I'm somewhat encourage that Canon has maintained good quality per pixel.
therock wrote:
The AF system is the same as that of the 20D? Are we sure about that? Type-O. Did you mean 40D?
No, I'm precise with my language use. Did you even read the article? It states, "Same as the old 40D and 5D of 2005: 9 points. This is the same as the 30D, which is same as 20D of 2004." Do some reading before accusing people of errors.
dcmiller wrote:
Remember that 1/2 the population has an IQ < 100.
Actually, this is geographically determined. If you were to go to the oval office/white house (Washington DC), an IQ just south of room temperature is enough to make you the boss and the "decider".
I don't know why everyone is bashing KR. You guys either forgetful, don't know his history, or this is much ado about nothing.
KR was the most flagrantly biased guy on the web 4 years ago, and it was all negative about Canon, while Nikon could do no wrong. he persisted even after buying a 5d until he actually compared the files. He finally got what all the Canon people were talking about. Since then, he has both ameliorated his tone, and is apparently willing to be more honest about both brands. His reasons may be pragmatic as an awareness that angering at least 50% (Canon shooters) of photographers reading web articles could limit his income opportunities. He now seems willing to bash Nikon whenever he feels compelled.
I see almost nothing wrong with what he said. He blew the 20d-50d AF, but also praised Canon's AF capabilities more than 90% of the Canon fanboys here. Here's what he said
"Canon's AF systems have always been excellent, and the AF system of the Canon 20D of 2004, which seems to be what's in the 50D, was excellent and better than anything from Nikon up until the Nikon D3 of 2007".
and to conclude, his recommendation said...
"I may poke fun of the 50D's "so what" features, which simply are following Nikon from the year before, and the fact that the 50D is still mostly the same 10D/20D/30D/40D we've been seeing for years, but the important thing is that the images that come off these Canon cameras simply look wonderful.
I love the colors that I can get from every one of Canon's cameras, especially since the 5D of 2005 which lets me crank the saturation up to +4. The color pallet of all Canons just looks great".
Go ahead and bash the guy, but with a previously biased guy like that saying positive things like this, I don't know why so many of you have your panties in a bunch...
Yes!
We all should give him the $ 5 he asked for. His website is a fulltimejob. He is doing it at home. And that means his family still grows. Children ARE expensive. Wives are, too.
But compared to us he does not have to pay anything for his gear I think. A camera that will not be available before October in his hands means its a marketing present. Even well paid I would guess. Maybe I should do my own: "Thats great gear in photographie - I do not want to work - and I have a BIG family" website, too. I still need some gear.
Max ISO used is 640. Looks incredibly clean though.
All the shots taken in RAW and developed in DPP.
Those pics make me feel better about the 50D. I actually started looking at Nikon's after seeing the DPreview images (I owned an F4 back in the days). I've been ready to replace my 20D for a couple years and have been waiting for a big quality jump without spending a fortune on a body that will be outdated in a couple years. The 50D, or possibly the 5D Mark II look like they will be pretty substantial upgrades from the 20D - I need to justify the purchase to "the one who must be obeyed". I have the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, 17-40mm f/4L USM, and the 300mm f/4L IS USM, so I really don't want to jump the Canon ship.
thedigitalbean wrote:
In this case Ken Rockwell doesn't know what he is talking about. He says the 50D has the same AF system as the 40D, then goes on to say that it has the same AF system as the 30D which is false (which in turn he says is the same AF as the 20D). He bases his statement on the fact that both bodies have 9 AF points.
and then he said that 15MP JPG is 100% always better than 7.5MP sRAW1 and that sRAW is only for nerds.
Max ISO used is 640. Looks incredibly clean though.
All the shots taken in RAW and developed in DPP.
these look way better!
a crappy lens and yet much sharper than the DPR samples.
no longer worried about color and sharpness, at least at lower ISO.
still unsure about noise performance (and oclor at supe rhigh ISO), but hopefully fine.
skibum5 wrote:
these look way better!
a crappy lens and yet much sharper than the DPR samples.
no longer worried about color and sharpness, at least at lower ISO.
still unsure about noise performance (and oclor at supe rhigh ISO), but hopefully fine.
I agree about oclor at supe rhigh ISO - whatever it means
I do a lot of action photography and have a 30 and 40d. Both cameras have focusing problems when shooting action and low light(or just action and good light!). Does anyone know if this has been resolved with the 50d yet?
Ralph Conway wrote:
I think he mentioned that the AF basics did not change. The 40D AF is far over the 20Ds in accuracy and performence. And imo 50Ds will be so compared to 40D
I couldn't agree more and we can take it one step farther my 40D is more accurate than the 30D I had along with performance so I am thinking the 50 will be ahead of the 40
DJR 17 wrote:
I do a lot of action photography and have a 30 and 40d. Both cameras have focusing problems when shooting action and low light(or just action and good light!). Does anyone know if this has been resolved with the 50d yet?
Ralph Conway wrote:
Yes!
We all should give him the $ 5 he asked for. His website is a fulltimejob. He is doing it at home. And that means his family still grows. Children ARE expensive. Wives are, too.
But compared to us he does not have to pay anything for his gear I think. A camera that will not be available before October in his hands means its a marketing present. Even well paid I would guess. Maybe I should do my own: "Thats great gear in photographie - I do not want to work - and I have a BIG family" website, too. I still need some gear.
GregM5 wrote:
Those pics make me feel better about the 50D. I actually started looking at Nikon's after seeing the DPreview images (I owned an F4 back in the days). I've been ready to replace my 20D for a couple years and have been waiting for a big quality jump without spending a fortune on a body that will be outdated in a couple years. The 50D, or possibly the 5D Mark II look like they will be pretty substantial upgrades from the 20D - I need to justify the purchase to "the one who must be obeyed". I have the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, 17-40mm f/4L USM, and the 300mm f/4L IS USM, so I really don't want to jump the Canon ship. ...Show more →
I have seen this time and time again right after all these photo's pop up after it is announced and people get turned off then the camera hits the market and everyone raves about it. I almost didn't buy my 40D I think it was because of these bad samples that are posted
. Oh believe me, I have a very low opinion of KR, I was just trying to be nice by saying 'in this case'. 
