What are your thoughts on Ken Rockwell?

Question

Hi,

Ken Rockwell is a guy who poses as a camera expert and has his own site named after him.

He is the laughing stock of serious photographers, but for some reason he seems to be getting a lot of traffic in his site from amateurs who like his style of writing.

Here are some thoughts on him from another photographer, I think this hit the nail right on the head!

http://www.bahneman.com/liem/blog/article.php?story=Ken_Rockwell_Facts

Originally this was going to be a message for Dr. Sam, but I couldn't send it directly, hope he reads it!

Ignacio

Answer 1

When I was in college, it was required that I take one full year of a physical education class. This was not a general "gym" class, but I had to choose a team sport and take a one hour class in that sport three times a week. I signed up for fencing, thinking I wouldn't even break a sweat and I could fulfill my PE requirement easier with fending then, say, rowing crew. I made out okay and the coach - a past US Olympic team coach - actually invited me to join the freshman team. I moved like a "sack of potatoes," as he put it, but I had the basics down. In a way, this was my greatest asset. I didn't know enough to get into trouble. Fencing is a sport of the elite and the guys who had been fencing at "Salle This" or "Salle That" made no bones about their feelings for me and my lack of finesse. I did not deserve to be on the team, because I did not even touch my first foil until I was seventeen. They had been fencing at elite private clubs since they were seven. I have a life-long friend who still makes his living teaching the martial arts. He is known the world over within his discipline. He's good at what he does, including some weapons like you might see in a Chuck Norris movie. One time when I was home, we were talking and he was very surprised to hear that I was on the fencing team at an Ivy League university. I was telling him some things about the sport and he said that it sounded quite like one of the weapons that he knew about. Of course, we suited up and started to fence. The first time I lunged at him, he practically took my arm off! I told him that fencing was "more of a finesse sport" than that and he asked, "Well isn't the idea to kill or be killed?" His simple analysis left me dumbfounded and speechless. He was right, after all. Fencing was a modern representation of the brutal fighting that won or lost battles and lives in the Crusades and beyond.

This is how I view Ken Rockwell. First, let me categorically state that I am in no position to criticize Mr. Rockwell. I have only seen about 10% of his website and I have probably seen less than 1% (one percent) of his photography. I have about a dozen little shots of my own on-line to help me make a point when speaking about certain questions, but my best body of work – if there is such a thing – exists on film. I’ve scanned a number of slides of our children growing up (and I have a thousand or two left to do), but I have not taken time to even scan any of my favorite photographs that used to hang on one wall or another in my various residences. You have seen one tenth of one percent of what I think I am capable of. I am sure that is how it is with me and Ken Rockwell’s photography. I’ve only looked at a few samples that pertain to a lens test or a camera test and I have seen only about 40-50 of his more “artistic” shots. I just haven’t looked at them yet.

I read this personal introduction on his website and you should, too.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm

"This is my personal website. I do it all myself. I started this because I wanted a place to record my personal observations which I could access from anywhere. Search engines then found it. I've never promoted it. I love to share what I love, but with my friends.

"This site is purely my personal opinion.

"This site is a work of fiction and any resemblance to any actual people, places or products is purely coincidental. This site is private and provided only for the entertainment of me and my personal friends. Read at your own risk. I offer no warrantees of any kind, except that there are many deliberate gaffes and practical jokes lurking."

~~~ ~~~

Maybe Ken Rockwell is to photographers like Steichen or Adams or Weston what I was to the elite members of the fencing team or like my martial arts friend was to me. Maybe I am more like my martial arts friend than a real photographer compared to you. Isn’t the point of photography to record an image on film or digitally so you can recall that moment at some point in the future? Shouldn’t you just DO IT, as Nike says? Grab a camera and snap, snap, snap. That’s why I bought my new Canon SD900 as a pocket camera. That's why I have the less-than-perfect 18-200 zoom lens. Sometimes I just want to take the darn picture and that’s all I want to do. Of course, my family and friends has come to expect a certain standard from me, so I wanted to improve the odds of getting it “right” most of the time by choosing a great camera to carry in my pocket or an _acceptable_ lens for my dSLR's. Yeah, I like my 17-55 f/2.8 a whole lot better than the 18-200, but for most people who ask questions here, it's just not the right choice.

I know you are cringing right now. I am. I grew up with photography, starting with a camera and doing my own developing and printing from the time I was about 8 years old. That’s almost 50 years ago. I used to teach photography when I was in college. No, it wasn’t a university course, but there are at least a dozen people who probably still love photography today because I spent some time with them 40 years ago showing them the in’s and out’s and teaching them how to use a camera. If they asked, I was critical, but mostly I just wanted to teach them how to get a decent exposure so they wouldn’t waste money on film with bad pictures. You know what? That was all they really wanted. They “admired” my pictures hanging on the wall or occasionally published, but they were not trying to rise even to my lowly level.

I may have read him wrong, but I think Ken Rockwell is that guy who just wants to pass along a little information to some amateur photographers who have stumbled upon his website. I don’t even know for sure that he is a professional photographer. In fact, I am not even sure he has to work for a living, based on some of his family biography.

In any event, I will let others criticize if they must. I am happy to send people to his site so they see some sample images and get the idea what 18 mm looks like as opposed to 800 mm. I am glad that he is available as an accessible resource.

If Ken Rockwell is a guy who poses as a camera expert, then what am I? I am better at photography than about 98% of the people I know - including some people who make their living at it - and I can help at least half of them choose equipment and help them with critique, but I am just some guy posing as a camera expert. Yahoo! Never made me take any tests before they let me answer questions here and I have no idea what criteria I met to be named as a “Top Contributor,” as if that is some sort of credential. Like a substitute teacher, all I have to do is stay one step ahead of the class. Rockwell is at least ten steps ahead of me. It’s easier to use a link to his site and let people learn from his easy style than try to duplicate it in this limited forum.

Answer 2

Hi Ignacio,
Funny piece. I read it last week when somebody linked to it from the DPReview Nikon forum. And as you pointed out in a previous answer, the crowd at DPReview is pretty fed up with Ken Rockwell. I agree with them. Ken Rockwell provides a wealth of information on his site, but he's also a horribly biased Nikon fan and his reviews can be pretty shoddy.
Here's his take on the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1755.htm
If you were to believe Ken, this $1200 professional zoom is a waste of money, just get the $100 Nikon 18-55mm?!
Here's a review he wrote for a lens that he's hardly touched: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2035af.htm
And the list goes on.
Many of his articles and reviews are good however, and I've linked to a few of his pages myself.
In my profile, I link to his site with a warning label. I also link to a few other sites - places with consistently reliable informations but less articles.
As for his review of the 18-200mm, the review that prompted this, it's typical Ken with claims like "My 18-200mm VR is more than just a new lens. It's changed the way I live and make photos" and "The 18-200mm VR just became the world's best portrait lens, especially for pets". But in the end, his write up is pretty decent.
I'll let Sam know that you posted this question. And don't piss him off - in about 2 days he's going to take over the top spot in the Cameras category :-)
Kind regards,
Jeff
P.S. I viewed your website yesterday. I was too lazy to create an account to add a comment then, but I liked it. A lot.

Answer 3

Kenrockwell.com

Answer 4

The list is false from what I understand. But she did inquire, the librarian said it would be unacceptable. Then she recieved a letter for Palin abotu being fired.