Ken Rockwell Site

[Concisus Cognatus]

I've been unable to hit it today, keeps timing out. Just wondering if anyone else is experiencing this problem if it's just me?

[RKDauph]

Same here.

[Concisus Cognatus]

Ok, seems the problem is with his dns resolution at the server itself. I can ping it, trace to it, but, it just does not respond to an http request.

[Tom]

Why would anyone want to go to Ken Rockwell's site?

[Concisus Cognatus]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

Why would anyone want to go to Ken Rockwell's site?

It's been a useful site for me, speaking as a pure amateur.

[Cajungaltx]

Yeah - I've used it quite a few times... I like his writing style...

[Thorpeland]

Im torn on the writings of Mr. Rockwell. Sometimes i'll be reading something on his site and think "ok thats pretty cool". Other times, i just shake my head and think "and this is where all the jokes come from". haha

I guess he's no more opinionated than any other photog ive ever run across. He has just somehow become the most heard. :-)

[Tom]

There are MUCH better places to go for information than his site.

Some great KR quotes:


"The SB-900 is a flash for full-time newsmen and wedding shooters. It's a poor choice for general photography, for which no flash at all is best, and your built-in flash is usually perfect for daytime fill."

"I love the tiny, inexpensive 18-55mm lens that came with my D40. It's the only lens you may ever need."

"Many people still cling to the mystique of the tripod, even though tripods went out with film cameras. Tripods are no longer required, and actually often degrade sharpness, because shutter speeds have climbed and IS and VR lenses reduced the need for slower speeds. "

"Smaller apertures which soften images. Don't shoot at smaller than f/8 or f/11 unless you really need it. "

"The 18-200mm VR just became the world's best portrait lens"

"Cameras and lenses have little to do with the quality of your pictures."

[Thorpeland]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

"Cameras and lenses have little to do with the quality of your pictures."

Oh! That is a good one! Noted. LOL

[Cajungaltx]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

There are MUCH better places to go for information than his site.

Some great KR quotes:


"The SB-900 is a flash for full-time newsmen and wedding shooters. It's a poor choice for general photography, for which no flash at all is best, and your built-in flash is usually perfect for daytime fill."

"I love the tiny, inexpensive 18-55mm lens that came with my D40. It's the only lens you may ever need."

"Many people still cling to the mystique of the tripod, even though tripods went out with film cameras. Tripods are no longer required, and actually often degrade sharpness, because shutter speeds have climbed and IS and VR lenses reduced the need for slower speeds. "

"Smaller apertures which soften images. Don't shoot at smaller than f/8 or f/11 unless you really need it. "

"The 18-200mm VR just became the world's best portrait lens"

"Cameras and lenses have little to do with the quality of your pictures."

Okay - I'm going to argue on behalf of Mr. Rockwell on a couple things... I pretty much agree with you overall - his market is definitely NOT the professional photographer... and this is a 'personal' site for him...

So here are my two questions/statements...

The camera's and lenses quote.... the entire discussion is about how little the camera has to do with getting an awesome image. That you can get REALLY freaking awesome images with a $3 box camera.... that you don't NEED thousands of dollars worth of equipment to be a GOOD photographer.

I agree with him on that...

About the smaller apertures giving softer photos... and correct me if I'm wrong...but isn't the sharpest resolution of of a lens is closer to it's middle apertures than it's extremes? Not only that - but doesn't diffraction cause the smallest aperture to soften the image a bit as well?

[Tom]

The camera's and lenses quote.... the entire discussion is about how little the camera has to do with getting an awesome image. That you can get REALLY freaking awesome images with a $3 box camera.... that you don't NEED thousands of dollars worth of equipment to be a GOOD photographer.

I will be the first to tell you that my clients don't hire me because of my camera or lens. In fact, MILLIONS of people have the same cameras that I have. People hire me because of my ability. I'm not Joe Rosenthal or Joe McNally or any other great Joe, but I am pretty good.

But the camera and lens are tools that can work for the person with the right abilities. Or they can work against someone without them. I can't get the same picture with a Rebel and kit lens that I can get with a 5D2 and a 35L (neither of which I have, both of which I have great lust over.) So to the point that the photographer's ABILITY matters, yes, he is absolutely right. But without the right tools, you just can't do everything.

About the smaller apertures giving softer photos... and correct me if I'm wrong...but isn't the sharpest resolution of of a lens is closer to it's middle apertures than it's extremes? Not only that - but doesn't diffraction cause the smallest aperture to soften the image a bit as well?

Diffraction certainly plays a role, but when the guy loves a soft lens to begin with, I am not totally sure he understands what he is talking about.

[ito4u]

In regards to Ken and soft lens, he pretty much doesn't know what he's talking about. In the past he has also stated that his website is more for entertainment purposes as well. I take his opinion with agrain of salt as he uses his technical terms incorrectly and rants way to often.

[zebulus]

I agree with him that you dont need an excellent camera to make a good picture. But I disagree with him on alot of things as well.

Im sorry, but anyone who dosent utilize the full power of their camera is just retarted. I hate it when people buy into his "you dont need RAW, just use jpeg and your fine" bit. Even if you have a Nikon D40, squeeze every inch of detail out of it that you can, and the best way to do that is by using RAW.

[Tom]

RAW is not always the best choice for photography. When you are shooting sports underdeadline, RAW will hurt your ability to meet the deadline because it adds steps to the process and slows your turnaround down.

Im sorry, but anyone who dosent utilize the full power of their camera is just retarted.

We have some absolutely brilliant photographers on this forum and no one on this forum utilizes the full power of their camera on a daily basis.

[Cajungaltx]

Originally Posted by zebulus

I agree with him that you dont need an excellent camera to make a good picture. But I disagree with him on alot of things as well.

Im sorry, but anyone who dosent utilize the full power of their camera is just retarted. I hate it when people buy into his "you dont need RAW, just use jpeg and your fine" bit. Even if you have a Nikon D40, squeeze every inch of detail out of it that you can, and the best way to do that is by using RAW.

Absolutely... while I am an Iphone convert... the entire thing is built on the 80/20 rule. 80% of the population only use 20% of what something is technologically capable of.

I think for 'most' people - they aren't looking for 'complicated'... they are looking to do something reasonably well...without alot of extra 'work'...

I disagree with you that a person who shoots a D40 in jpeg is retarded... they probably have very valid reasons for doing so. Probably the same reasons why they hardly take it out Auto...

You or I may look at what they are doing, and because we 'know' more... we 'KNOW' more, and think they aren't doing it 'right'...

But seriously - before we knew what we were doing... JPEG was just fine...