Are Leica lenses getting too expensive for Ken Rockwell?

[chip j]

I've been waiting in vain for reviews of the latest 0.95 & 50 APO-ASPH.

 

[MattKing]

He probably only reviews what he can borrow for free.

 

[chip j]

Yeah, but other people have reviewed them.

 

[Huss]

He could always rent them for a weekend. But yes, it seems that he only reviews what he has on hand or people lend to him.
To be fair to him, what he does have on Leica glass is pretty extensive and I found it helpful learning the ropes.

The last good thing I read on his site was this review, I have two of them so I'm biased:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikonos/v.htm

 

[fstop]

I'll have to loan him some.

 

[Chan Tran]

I have the feeling that some camera he reviewed he didn't even see in person.

 

[fstop]

Some cameras you don't have to see in person to know they aren't up to the hype.Most people who gripe about him,do so because he didn't review their gear or didn't like the review he gave their gear or its simple jealousy.
One thing you have to recognize is that he is independent.Back in the 70s and 80s every camera rag that came out would always praise the company that spent the most money with their advertising dept. much in the same way Motor Trend awarded car of the year to the make and model that paid the most in advertising dollars.
For that reason KR potentially has more credibility than the magazines.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Not only that, he's done somewhat real-world comparisons (*) I've seen nowhere else, for example:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/85mm-corner-comparison.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/comparisons/50mm-f12/

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/pro-normal-zooms/index.htm


(*) Using "specially grown reference trees"

 

[Prest_400]

KR during my first forays of photography is what got me some of the transition into basics knowledge and into film. Back in 2008 and me being about 14; he was all over Velvia, because real RAW(tm) Velvia is the amazing amazingest material. In the meantime, I thought that for a family event I'd take the old Nikon F401 (clunky). I found some dad's slides, I liked the results from the event. lDecided that instead of dropping hard saved cash on a DSLR I'd buy an OM-1. Best photographic decision on my early days.

Not only that, he's done somewhat real-world comparisons (*) I've seen nowhere else, for example:

(*) Using "specially grown reference trees"

There's certainly useful material in there. Last summer checking what kind of cheapish AF SLR kit I could get, his Nikon reviews are useful information.

He's turned into some kind of "Deal" site nowadays with just links, and every once in a while some kind of review pops around. But it's mostly deals and far from what it was. Useful things come in waves, a while ago he was all over some Leica lenses and cameras, nowadays unheard.

He could always rent them for a weekend. But yes, it seems that he only reviews what he has on hand or people lend to him.
To be fair to him, what he does have on Leica glass is pretty extensive and I found it helpful learning the ropes.

The last good thing I read on his site was this review, I have two of them so I'm biased:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikonos/v.htm

Yay, the nikonos! I rather disliked him reviewing some cameras that were nice deals because it may rise the market value for some of them.
I'd love that some "stranger" sent me a nikonos V frankly. I'd put it to a nice use by the sea in summer, or even into the tropics!

 

[Theo Sulphate]

...
He's turned into some kind of "Deal" site nowadays with just links, and every once in a while some kind of review pops around. But it's mostly deals and far from what it was. Useful things come in waves, a while ago he was all over some Leica lenses and cameras, nowadays unheard.
...

The digital photography world is saturated with equipment that's more than good enough. The major companies haven't been introducing equipment anywhere near the hectic pace they did between 2005-2013. Since KR relies on new things being introduced for him to review and get attention, I suspect he's had to fall back on making money by people clicking on his links to advertisers.

His site is still useful and I kind of like the hyperbole he injects in some articles just for fun.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Why concern yourself with Ken Rockwell's opinion? All of us, any of us are more knowledgeable about photography than he ever will be.

 

[cliveh]

You don't have to review a Leica lens as you know it is optical perfection.

 

[fstop]

Why concern yourself with Ken Rockwell's opinion? All of us, any of us are more knowledgeable about photography than he ever will be.

Aren't we sour grapes because he doesn't have a review on Hassy, but no he does have a review on the Dead Link Removed

 

[tomfrh]

any of us are more knowledgeable about photography than he ever will be.

I don't understand this attitude towards him. Regardless of what one makes of his style and marketing he seems fairly well informed.

 

[fstop]

I don't understand this attitude towards him. Regardless of what one makes of his style and marketing he seems fairly well informed.

It all boils down to jealousy, envy etc and people expect him to heap praise on their favorite brand. If they try to tell you otherwise they are lying.

 

[rthollenbeck]

My wife and I both look to K.R. site about items we know nothing about. His lens reviews for let's say Nikon lenses are great because there are so many of simalar length it's hard to know witch is the desirable one.

I don't preport this to be errfutable but I was reading one of his reviews (I think it was the SWC) and it sounded to me like he was requesting: anyone to give him ONE to keep and he would review it. Anyway if that really is what he's waiting on before reviewing the newest Noctilux, it maybe far off.
To be honest I find reviews of very specialized/exotic items like the Noctilux to be less useful. First info on what's-what on these items is ez to find. Second if you have need for any one of the family you already know they are great. Lastly most people who buy these are just showing off anyway and would likely be much better served by any one of the normal 50s Leica makes.
I was going to try to make some car comparison or the like but the fact is, there are very few 50s by major makers are less than great.

 

[Alan Gales]

I like Ken.

When I was looking to buy my first Digital camera I found his site. His advice helped me decide upon a new Nikon D200. I also took his advice and bought the little Nikon flash and an 18-200VR lens. They worked perfectly for me until I bought a used Nikon D300 with the better autofocusing. Since I no longer shoot sports I took his advice again and bought a Fujifilm X100s which I am very happy with.

Ken also had an article on Novatron Studio lights. I ended up buying a set dirt cheap to use with the Mamiya RZ67 I had. I sold the RZ when I bought a 4x5 but still own the Novatrons. They are not powerful enough for large format but will work well with the Mamiya C220f I recently bought. I also own a Wein slave so I can shoot digital with them as well. I shot my wife's picture with my D300 and Novatrons for the company website. Her boss was thrilled with it.

Ken also got me interested in large format with his Tachihara article. I started with a Cambo SC 4x5 and then went to the Tachihara 4x5. I now own a Wehman 8x10.

I don't agree with everything Ken says. I don't agree with everything anyone says. Like him or not, his website does have a lot of useful information for film users as well as digital users.

 

[NB23]

Well at least he isn't bullsheeting about those lenses.

Now let's talk about steve huff a little bit. Is he really in contact with BB.King's and Robin William's ghosts as he claims to be?

Google it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Aren't we sour grapes because he doesn't have a review on Hassy, but no he does have a review on the Dead Link Removed

No, he at times has published some real rubbish and I gave up reading his articles.

I don't understand this attitude towards him. Regardless of what one makes of his style and marketing he seems fairly well informed.

Maybe he has learned to do some research before his shoots from the hip.

It all boils down to jealousy, envy etc and people expect him to heap praise on their favorite brand. If they try to tell you otherwise they are lying.

Actually not, I could not even begin to pretend to care if he were to like some of the cameras which I like. I have had a successful photographic life without him. I much rather read things by Ralph Lambrecht, Ansel Adams, Tim Rudman and PE.

 

[removed account4]

It all boils down to jealousy, envy etc and people expect him to heap praise on their favorite brand. If they try to tell you otherwise they are lying.

maybe ..
you are probably right ...

 

[Chan Tran]

Why concern yourself with Ken Rockwell's opinion? All of us, any of us are more knowledgeable about photography than he ever will be.

I don't concern about his opinion but I found his site is informative. He tends to reveal a camera or lens country of origin while I don't see that information any where else. I know most people would say why I want to know but please don't slam me for wanting to know.

 

[Luis-F-S]

Lastly most people who buy these are just showing off anyway and would likely be much better served by any one of the normal 50s Leica makes.

++1. You think?!!!!

 

[4season]

Why not ask Rockwell himself?! Nah, too straightforward and obvious.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Why concern yourself with Ken Rockwell's opinion? All of us, any of us are more knowledgeable about photography than he ever will be.

I doubt that.

 

[kobaltus]

I've been waiting in vain for reviews of the latest 0.95 & 50 APO-ASPH.

Are Leica lenses getting too expensive for Ken Rockwell?



I don't understand the purpose of this thread.