KR got my toes wet in photography along w/ my friend that was a photographer for Dirt Rag (MTB bikes). I did learn some bad habits from him, so I stopped going to his site.

Leica has always been very expensive. I wish I had purchased an M-6 and a couple of lenses years ago instead of multiple Contax G2s and lenses. Contax made the better camera and their lenses were as good and much less expensive. However, if I had bought the Leica, the lenses would now be usable on the M-9. The lenses have about doubled in cost and have even increased in resale had I wanted to sell them.

The Contax on the other had now languishes with all that beautiful glass.

Leica pricing is high. Check out the pre-release price on the S2 - $22,995.00 for the body, add a few lenses and you're over $50,000. But, then look at Hasselblads... For those guys the S2 could represent a bargain.

I do understand KR's love of Leica. Having shot extensively with the G2s, a rangefinder is a much better camera for me in cities and among people. The only time an SLR is better for my use is in macro work or with long telephotos (which I seldom use). No reflex mirror allows for better lens design, greater ruggedness, quiet and no blackout. All even better in real life than in the imagination.

Looks like they've taken the printer manufacturer's approach where the printers are cheap and a full set of inks could very well cost more than the printer itself.

lol I think we have a new spin to the whole story... he is all over Leica's now

the funniest part of it ... he is saying that Leica is cheaper thn Canon or Nikon.... true ... but look at the cost of the lenses ... I was like WTF whn I saw it : )

I guess Im just trying to keep this post alive : )

I think if everyone REALLY loved Ken, we'd all be running around with 18-55 equipped D40s =P

-- Dave

"if you wonder how he gets to buy those fancy Leica lenses, just stop pressing on the "make a donation" button on his web site. then, you'll notice him buying a few less toys...... "
guy is doing something good why not ? I click on his adds now and then
dont think he gets much in donations

if you wonder how he gets to buy those fancy Leica lenses, just stop pressing on the "make a donation" button on his web site. then, you'll notice him buying a few less toys......

any one got any idea whn he will get out of Leica s and starts writing something about Nikon or photography in general...
use to be my every-day-must-visit web site now its more like 1th a week...

[quote=mtkmmt] "He allready has allmost every nikon lense ever made and now he's bying leica on rate of one lense per week. i mean he's wife is some sort of estate queen so he's probably living with her money anyway and just buys stuff he likes. [/quote]

He WAS an engineer for many years and seems to be pretty smart with his money. I doubt his wife is his sugar mama.

He does great reviews some days and when he gets bored he does entertainment.
Check his review of the D300 vs 'The Leica Man' to see what I mean.

K1W1 said it best

My opinion is that Ken is sometimes entertaining and sometimes helpfull with his beginner level guides but it's quite clear that he is living in denial and is in fact...a measurebator/collector....a creature he so much loaths everyday. i think this came up when he turned to Leica. He allready has allmost every nikon lense ever made and now he's bying leica on rate of one lense per week. i mean he's wife is some sort of estate queen so he's probably living with her money anyway and just buys stuff he likes.

Much of the time very interesting but at other times a bit hard to take. Far too opinionated to take seriously, but entertaining none the less.

I found his first notes on the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G incoherent to say the least but he has cleanded it up a bit. He seems to be going a bit overboard on the film stuff lately.

i am reasonnably new to photography, to which I take very seriously. when i first searched the web for info and reviews his site poped up...several times. thankfully due to other more "credible" sites such as dpreview (which i read like a bible) i have come to learn how to read Ken....just like listening to Howard Stern. people who hate him read just to see what he'll say next, and people who love him read him because they....love him. but i must say this site is a great place to put his sayings to the test.

can't wait for april 14th.....

I heard it best put as "He's right more often than he is wrong."

-- Dave

Gentoo - I never got hooked on the ones you posted - I use them for reference but they really do not deliver from general point of view ...
u have to know what u are looking for and just reference to that

and yeah whats up with a crap web design on most of the photographers web sites ? ? ?

"I love his way to write, provocant and clear. I hate boring blogs and he is a lovely exception."

This I do have to say I agree with. The two sites I linked to, while extremely helpful and informative, can be rather dry at times.

One thing I do have in common with him is that I also love my colors to jump out. Perhaps not as wild as he likes them but certainly vibrant. I used his users guide to set my D300 the way I like it. Yes I have the users manual (which is terrible) and I have David Busch's book. KR's just helped me better in this area so I used it. In other areas I find others more useful.

Like him or loathe him - his stuff is free, so isn't costing you a lot except in time, and, apparently for some people, frustration. His present kick on using film is hardly original, and most of us have a film body or several loitering in a cupboard. Certainly using any amount of film in your existing bodies is a great deal cheaper than buying this years's digital whizz. Digital (DX) suits me because it adds 50% to my focal lengths, which is important for motor sports from public areas. Ken also ticked a box for me recently when he praised the Voigtlander 15mm f4.5, which I've owned for years. Read his stuff, evaluate for your own findings. Then move on.

I believe he is a really nice person. I love his way to write, provocant and clear. I hate boring blogs and he is a lovely exception.

Bye

"if you can show me other website with that many Nikon lenses reviewed and tested I will gladly switch but for now sfu and enjoy what we can get, everyone is different in their own little way"

Ok seriously?

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

http://www.bythom.com/nikon.htm

if you can show me other website with that many Nikon lenses reviewed and tested I will gladly switch but for now sfu and enjoy what we can get, everyone is different in their own little way

I wouldn't say he's completely untrusted. Some really do trust him. Sometimes he's way out in left field. Hell he's out in the parking lot! At other times however I personally have found him to be true. His remarks about dpreview's review of the 70-200mm2.8 is an example. Like he mentioned, I can say that if I read their review first, I would not have purchased that lens. He said that they may not understand how to shoot with that lens. Perhaps he could be right? I know that I personally took horrible shots with it. Initially I blamed the lens and thought it was faulty. Then I realized that the photographer was faulty. I've still not completely learned the proper technique with this lens but I've gotten much better than when I first got it.

Now on the other hand, I think if he's going to do reviews, he should do all classes of equipment, specifically lenses. I am a telephoto shooter but he's not to schooled on them and says he likes wide angles. Fine but that doesn't help me much so he should review and use more telephotos lenses for accurate information which he lacks big time in this area.

Every time a thread like this starts on a forum, as it does regularly it improves his Google rankings and that drives hits on his web site which then generates flow through to the businesses he gets his kick backs from.

Is he a clever marketer? Yes

Is he a trusted source of photographic information? No

I was being a bit cynical... it ticks me off that so many people knock Ken on other Nikon Forums - but when one looks at their photographic efforts, they leave a lot to be desired.

I click on his site most days... I like to smile a little with my first 5:30am wake-up coffee of the morning. And I have tipped his hat too in appreciation, not because I learned anything (which I sometimes have), but because he puts a lot of effort into encouraging photographic discourse... even if more than a fair share of it backfires on him.

Ed Buziak wrote
"I think it's more to do with envy... because he probably has more gear than most people put together on this forum... and he takes better photos than most of the people on this forum."

Y'know, I'm willing to put my photography up against Ken's any day, except for the fact that we shoot entirely different subjects. And isn't Ken the one who says that your equipment doesn't matter? Why should I be jealous of him? I mean hell, I already have an 18-55, which he considers one of Nikon's best lenses.

I don't dislike Ken, but most people don't bother to read his "About" page, so they miss things like this:

"Read this site at your own risk. I make a lot of mistakes. I have no proof-reader and there are plenty of pages, like this one, which have been around since the 1990s and may no longer apply or be correct. I'm just one guy. No mater how stupid something may be, if I don't catch it, it gets out there anyway and stays wrong for years until someone points it out. I can't track everything; I've written thousand of pages and write a few more every day."

"I only update things as I discover errors. I offer no warrantees of any kind, except that there are many deliberate gaffes, practical jokes and downright foolish and made-up things lurking. While this site is mostly accurate, it is neither legally binding nor guaranteed. The only thing I do guarantee is that there is plenty of stuff I simply make up out of thin air, as does The Onion."

"I love a good hoax. Read The Museum of Hoaxes, or see their site. A hoax, like this site, is done as a goof simply for the heck of it by overactive minds as a practical joke."

The "problem" with KR, is that many people looking to get into photography take his reviews and comments as gospel, which can lead to them buying more than they need, or (as I would imagine is more often the case) less than they need.

As several people have said above, "I read KR when I was just getting started, but nor so much now that I have a better understanding of what I'm doing". Once I started to figure things out on my own, I realized that Ken was wrong on quite a few matters, at least for me.