The whole KR "debate" can only lead to a continued back and forth that will hurt people's feelings. This post was started over a year ago and since then we've implemented new forum rules that are meant to avoid such pointless debate. This post was buried for a while but it clearly now violates our rules so I'm closing it.

Gentoo said:

Yeah he lost almost all credibility with me now trying to lie to people.

You mean he actually had credibility with you before this?

NSXType-R said:
Not to be a Rockwell supporter, but I do like reading his lens reviews. I know he doesn't shoot with all of the lenses, but I haven't seen any better lens review sites.

You have to be joking. Photozone.de is about 10x more reliable a review than Ken.

The only way he is even being read is because he comes up in almost every Nikon related google search.

I think Ken Rockwell's site is very good for what it is. I think Thom Hogan is in a different league and has some amazing stuff. I guess Gentoo has a point in terms of the location of that certain photo. I also would say that Ken Rockwell has helped Nikon D40 sales. Owning a D40X which is far from my favorite camera I do not share his view of that camera. I guess I take photography way too seriously. All NR readers and posters are NOT men. There are a few women reading and posting as I do know them as real people and they do not pretend to be as far into photography as many NR guys are. I expect that there will be a topic started on D3100 and two lens recommendations for that soon to illustrate my point. They have contacted me and asked about entry level DSLR cameras and are pretty good photographers. I tend to see Ken Rockwell's photos as very market or his family promotional tools. Some of his camera and gear shots are well done according to my view of them.

good points.

Ken is consistently the top search result on pretty much every conceivable Nikon related topic. and i don't begrudge the fact at all, his site is a great database if you need any spec or feature.
what his articles lack in quality they more than make up in quantity. and while he is one of very strong opinions i often go there not only because he sometimes has good material, but because when i disagree with him(often), i think to myself "why do i disagree?" which is often leads to interesting places.

I have read snippets of criticisms and accolades of Ken Rockwell on this rumor site and although I am an ardent fan of his website I am in no doubt, as an SEO consultant what Ken's motives are.

1) To get top ranking on Google for the most often and latest search terms
2) To have as much traffic as possible through his site
3) Photography Tips

He cannot achieve 1) unless he writes tons of articles stuffed with keywords and keyphrases. This involves covering the same old topics repeatedly and laboring the point so Google get the message - you, his readers are not his primary target. He is often accused of writing about stuff he has not got in his hands yet. Why? search engines of course - because he is in a race with other website of the same ilk that rely on making a living by being relevant for the newest searches. Once you have been the first found by Google it is a difficult job to knock that website off that top spot. All webmasters are at it in every walk of life so why should Ken be different.

This relevancy give him traffic 2) out of which he makes a living from Google Adsense (Those tiny Google ads on the sides of his pages)of which he receives a small amount of each click. This traffic also helps him get a kickback from Adorama etc and he make no secret of this. Another source of revenue for him is the mentions he makes of an interesting bit of information he has or an experience etc.these usually lead to courses, books or some other revenue generating avenue.

The third reason Ken writes is because he is actually passionate about photography and is a technical geek that we can all learn a lot from - as long as we use our intelligence to discriminate between good objective advice and the sort of speculative advice he gives for the benefit of search engines.

I for one will keep reading his site because it is interesting and controversial and he has added words to my vocabulary (eg measurebator) that I would not have come across otherwise.

Well done Ken and keep up the good work for yourself and us!

mb, I understand you. ISO values belong to the possibilities my friend.

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=474#post-6167

@Gentoo - if I understood you correctly you want me to define you what I subjectively mean by objective and consistent so that most people would understand?
Well NikoDoby was consistent about not taking my objectively nonsense proposal seriously.
Was that definition not out of dictionary enough?

Tai is a HE? Oh wow, I'm really sorry Tai, my bad ! Are there ANY girls on this forum at all? (I still think Chloe is really just Connor going through some gender issues :^) (I'm kidding Chloe & Connor!!!)

We stick to the plan regardless of gender.

Can we kill this thread? Just asking. (ahhh crap... now I've bumped it!)

"I like the idea. Hearty you and mb buy the Nikon "toys" online with adamz and monty11's credit cards. But you use my address and send everything to me first. I will thoroughly test and evaluate each new "toy" and all the stuff I don't like I will send to Tai.

She can then review that stuff and write her conclusions on her website. Tai makes money from selling ads on her website and gives you guys half so that you can buy more Nikon goodies for Tai and I to review. Perfect.... ok, what are you guys sending me first? D300S with the new 70-200 or the D3000 with the new 18-200?

Why is everyone looking at me like that? This is a great plan people, let's do this !!!"

LOL! I love your humor. Right up my alley. :)

DP review already does a pretty nice graphical illustration of sharpness for lenses at their various focal lengths and apertures. They don't have very many though... aparently, it takes a lot of work.

Niko - tai is he, as for my cc ... You wouldn't buy too much with it, as most of the times it's empty :(

Tai is a she?

I like the idea. Hearty you and mb buy the Nikon "toys" online with adamz and monty11's credit cards. But you use my address and send everything to me first. I will thoroughly test and evaluate each new "toy" and all the stuff I don't like I will send to Tai.

She can then review that stuff and write her conclusions on her website. Tai makes money from selling ads on her website and gives you guys half so that you can buy more Nikon goodies for Tai and I to review. Perfect.... ok, what are you guys sending me first? D300S with the new 70-200 or the D3000 with the new 18-200?

Why is everyone looking at me like that? This is a great plan people, let's do this !!!

@ mb : Re starting a good nikon site .. I have been thinking of doing that but you know its not easy buy if we can get a few people together we could make a buck or 2 enough to buy toys anyway ... I have had an idea that could be able to graphically map the focal range and aperture in a 3D graph.. across several lenses .. would be great tool to help find your next lens .. but thats probably not enough .. to get a good site up .. what do you guys think?

shucks ... busted

I have my suspicions that KR is actually posting here as monty11 :^)

First, define objective and consistent. Not out of the dictionary but in a way most people would use those terms. The problem is no one speaks out of a dictionary so this leads to many interpretations of the same terms.

When I hear this, I think dry and boring, basically rehashed owners manuals which are essentially useless.

The KR post Strikes Back - just as we think it is forgotten he strikes back from the darkness, as irrelevant and as useless as always.
This was a bit too much …
I would actually love if there are more people like KR, just better, more consistent and objective people like Tom Hogan for example.
Unfortunately it is difficult to find a good and objective author on the web these days, our Tai is trying but just a good will and without resources it is probably not nearly enough.
Maybe we could try and organize something? What do you think?
We should of course develop objective and consistent methodology etc…

Monty11, there was a lot of sarcasm in my post that probably didn't come out right, don't worry about what I said. :D

English isn't my mother tongue either, but I consider my English lingual skills to be quite high and still I find myself rereading some of his sentences and trying to make sense of them ... I often face similar problems with UK solicitors who's actual aim is to make things complicated :D

@NSXType-R ... you are making a rather bold statement regarding KR, care to bring examples of this "most of the stuff he says is garbage"? Your statement leads me to believe that you have spent countless hours on his site reading what he has written, so it shouldn't be a problem for you to bring examples of the gems and the garbage.

I'm not a KR follower or anyone else's for that matter. But I like reading about photography A LOT and sometimes it does you good to review some of the basics (not what shutter speed and aperture mean). At least in my case some of the trivial and simple things get lost in the clutter of more complicated information and you end up making life a lot harder than it is. This is why I like to revisit things that I know. Different photographers have different ways and tricks. Instead of inventing the bicycle why not pick up a hint here and a trick there.

@Gentoo, I know this thread has ended up in a totally different place from where it started but it still is on the subject of KR so actually is there a need to start a new one?

Adamz, you've made very very good points. I've said this in the past as well that he is good for beginners. One of the reasons why is because rather than typing up a rehashed manual, he tells you why you may want to do something. After you start figuring things out though, you will begin to learn new stuff that KR may not talk about much or just state his personal belief on. He does understand some things very well, in fat better than anyone else. He's the only person I've ever come across on the web that understand Active-D Lighting at all for example. Oh and as far as him being confusing if English is not your mother language, he can still be confusing to those of us who mother tongue is English LOL.

Basically I agree with the way you've outlined above.

I look at Ken Rockwell like the retarded guy in the insane asylum. Not everything that comes out of his mouth is true, most of the stuff he says is garbage, but there are some gems in there if you really look for it.

I've been holding myself from posting anything in this thread, as I'm not a KR follower. However, I have to agree with monty, that there's a lot of good stuff on his webpage, especially when You are new to photography. Moreover, I live to long to believe in everything I've googled in the Web, but for me there are sites that should speak 100% truth, and KR site is one of them. Why? If You are a beginner, and You start Your journey with photography, You want to learn as much as possible in a short period of time (at least most of us work this way). Once You start doing Your research about some lens reviews, techniques, etc. sooner or later (rather sooner, as most of his articles are positioned quite well in search engines) You come across KR webpage, and if You are new to photography and Your mother tongue is not english, You may get confused. Therefore, I believe he should change his point of view, and at least in all articles presented on his webpage use only true information, that also includes proper picture naming. Either some of You like him or not, he gives a lot of people a lot of knowledge and he must take responsibility for this. In the meantime, here's an alternative to KR - Thom Hogan:)

Funny thing about this forum is how things end way out in left field LOL!

I originally started this thread because of him misrepresenting where a photo was taken. Now we are in every area except that LOL.