I was interested in the Sony A7 when it first came out, and his tests were the only one that mentioned - and illustrated with photographs - the awful sensor reflections it suffered from when there were bright light sources in the image.I don't understand this attitude towards him. Regardless of what one makes of his style and marketing he seems fairly well informed.
That's it. I really liked him back in 2009 (I was getting in the world and lots to learn) and his "passion" for film back then helped me get into it. I was intrigued by 4x5 LF because of his high opinion of LF (and Velvia) back then.I like Ken.
(...)
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.
Oh wow, didn't know about it. I dropped usual reading of SH quite a while ago, I think it's the "way too much positive" vibe of the site, too exaggerated somehow.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.
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 stopped reading Steve Huff years ago when I discovered that he has a companion website where he runs a business holding seances, investigating the paranormal, and selling "portals" so people can communicate with their dear departed. I'm serious; he is loony-tunes. I don't read Ken Rockwell either -way too much hyperbole about his favorite brands - but his site is a good archive of old technical information from manufacturers.
They are getting too expensive for everyone and overrated as well.
whats the difference between ken rockwell on his site and his hyberbole about his favorite brands
and people here, who love their om, or their hassy, or chamonoix, or deardorff, or their tmy2, or xtol or rodinal ?
its all opinion. there are wheelbarrows full of hyperbole on this site ... it doesn't seem much different ..
after all some people have scientific evidence their cameras and lenses are better, here, he just likes them better on his site ...
People here are not pretending to review photographic equipment and asking you to send them money to support their growing family.whats the difference between ken rockwell on his site and his hyberbole about his favorite brands
and people here, who love their om, or their hassy, or chamonoix, or deardorff, or their tmy2, or xtol or rodinal ?
its all opinion. there are wheelbarrows full of hyperbole on this site ... it doesn't seem much different ..
after all...
whats the difference between ken rockwell on his site and his hyberbole about his favorite brands
and people here, who love their om, or their hassy, or chamonoix, or deardorff, or their tmy2, or xtol or rodinal ?
its all opinion. there are wheelbarrows full of hyperbole on this site ... it doesn't seem much different ..
after all some people have scientific evidence their cameras and lenses are better, here, he just likes them better on his site ...
People here are not pretending to review photographic equipment and asking you to send them money to support their growing family.
Sometimes when someones asks which is the best xxx camera, after a number of posts based on favorites,
The big difference is that the people here freely admit their camera prejudices, while Ken Rockwell passes them off as both truth and gospel. Then KR takes great umbrage when someone calls him on it.
maybe they are not doing it for money and asking for support for their growing familyPeople here are not pretending to review photographic equipment and asking you to send them money to support their growing family.
maybe some of the people with deep love hate relationships with certain gear/materials &c ARE being paid as undercover shills for the industry...
it wouldn't surprise me, i've seen stranger things...
Sounds like we need some tin hat reviews....then again
who knows ..... maybe some of the people with deep love hate relationships with certain gear/materials &c ARE being paid as undercover shills for the industry...
it wouldn't surprise me, i've seen stranger things...
All these "operatives" being paid to endorse used photo equipment, that is no longer in production, by companies that no longer exist.
Sounds like we need some tin hat reviews.
I've seen the resulting 20"x24" negative taken with a Schneider XXL Fine Art lens (I'm in it) and it is pretty wonderful!plenty of people giving their opinions ( maybe paid by dealers, who knows ) about...how wonderful the schneider xxl fine art lenses are...
People here are not pretending to review photographic equipment and asking you to send them money to support their growing family.
And the pot calls the kettle black hahahahahahahaha
10,000.How many Ken Rockwells does it take to change a camera lens?
I invite others to complete the joke.
Hahaha....oh yes. Played out on the internet thousands of times a day.Asking what camera is best and then playing lawyer demanding anyone defend their assertions with a factual argument.....as if it is a discussion about the atomic weight of atoms..... borders on being asinine.
Reminds me of the Lincoln vs Cadillac debate in Donnie Brasco.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?