gb hill
Veteran
Sorry! but we already have someone here in the Yashica RF forums that make such assumptions....BTW how is ol Nick, haven't seen him around lately.
Sorry bud, but if you read the thread I never complained!...only instigated
i think i did touch on why i at least find him wrong when i gave my 3 examples of why what he says is daft
im not saying that either camera is better, what i am saying is that his comprasion is flawed as the cameras quite obviously (even if you dont take into acount what they cost) apeal to a very different market
the d40 is a great camera and im sure in some situations it takes better photos but im sure that the majority of rf fans would agree that really isnt the point
the beauty of the r-d1 in whatever guise is in its use, it makes you think
use of a d40 will inevitably in most caseslead to lazyness
gb hill
Veteran
This I totally agree with, especially the last statement!
gb hill
i am actually genuinly chuffed you see my point
it might i have taken 62 posts of convo on the subject but i now do at least feel the main antagonist gets what i was originally getting at
i am actually genuinly chuffed you see my point
it might i have taken 62 posts of convo on the subject but i now do at least feel the main antagonist gets what i was originally getting at
maybe i should have been more clear in the first place eh... instead of just bitchin at kr
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Sorry bud, but if you read the thread I never complained!...only instigated
Bud, re-read your post from which I snipped. Challenging someone's alternate value proposition?
As far as proving KR wrong, the whole comcept of proving one of his OPINIONS wrong is laughable.
at this point, satisfied i have got across my point and in doing so caused ruckus, i shall bid you all good night
photogdave
Shops local
He's basically taking an ironical point of view and lampooning all the other so-called experts on the internet. The more you read his stuff, the more it becomes clear.
At the end of the day he's having a laugh. I used to laugh at him but now I choose to laugh with him.
emraphoto
Veteran
can one of you wise old sage's explain to me how using a d40 makes one lazy? genuine curiosity.
No that would be an advert which is verboten.
to many automatic modes breed laziness
the d40 comes out of the box with the same working function as a compact digi. i know for a fact from selling the things for a good few years that they rarelyget taken out of auto or program at a push.
i never took my cameras out of auto or p until i got a voigtlander vito b and tought my self how to use a camera properly now they never leave a or m an the whole proccess is a lot more satisfying.
oris642
natural person
I enjoy reading Ken's blog. Why? Because at least he has an opinion, unlike many camera testing sites and magazines. In fact, I can honestly say I've learned a lot from his site.
And, no, he's not a dummy. His writing style is entertaining. Keep in mind that most of his readers are not camera nuts like us. I've sent quite a few friends to his site who happily told me later that they were entertained and informed enough to make a $5 donation.
If I recall correctly, Ken says that he used to make $170K a year before he started his site "for fun". His site gets over 100,000 hits a day. Let's say that 1 out of a 1,000 (.1%) send him $5, which apparently is the average donation on the Internet. That's $500 a day, or $182,500 a year, or more than he used to make as a sales engineer. In fact, I seem to recall reading somewhere that he hinted that he is making more money now than he used to in his career.
So, lets see... photography fan quits his job, starts a camera blog, makes more than he used to with a job, has his own business where he works his own hours, his own deadlines, gets to play with his kids while most guys are at work, plays with camera equipment all day, and gets to deduct his camera equipment and trips as business expenses.
Ken Rockwell a dummy? Nope. My hats off to him.
And, no, he's not a dummy. His writing style is entertaining. Keep in mind that most of his readers are not camera nuts like us. I've sent quite a few friends to his site who happily told me later that they were entertained and informed enough to make a $5 donation.
If I recall correctly, Ken says that he used to make $170K a year before he started his site "for fun". His site gets over 100,000 hits a day. Let's say that 1 out of a 1,000 (.1%) send him $5, which apparently is the average donation on the Internet. That's $500 a day, or $182,500 a year, or more than he used to make as a sales engineer. In fact, I seem to recall reading somewhere that he hinted that he is making more money now than he used to in his career.
So, lets see... photography fan quits his job, starts a camera blog, makes more than he used to with a job, has his own business where he works his own hours, his own deadlines, gets to play with his kids while most guys are at work, plays with camera equipment all day, and gets to deduct his camera equipment and trips as business expenses.
Ken Rockwell a dummy? Nope. My hats off to him.
i completely agree, fair play to him!
but im sure with the opinions he has he must expect and understand that people are going to apose them
what irks me is that a lot of what he says is contradictory. when i sold cameras i did have to, on a lot of occations, clear up confusion he had caused.
once in a while i even got in to heated debates with people over things like the previously mentions "vr makes tripods obsolete" comments he made
he is in a very powerfull position and i just think that sometimes he should think a bit more about his comments and perhaps aim to have an opinion that is a bit more consistant
so yeah credit where its due what he has done for him self is amazing. my question is, is what he is doing for the ameture photographer actually as good as it could be? im not so sure!!!
vr makes tripods obsolete......... think of how detrimental that information could be to a hobbiest photog just starting out?!?
but im sure with the opinions he has he must expect and understand that people are going to apose them
what irks me is that a lot of what he says is contradictory. when i sold cameras i did have to, on a lot of occations, clear up confusion he had caused.
once in a while i even got in to heated debates with people over things like the previously mentions "vr makes tripods obsolete" comments he made
he is in a very powerfull position and i just think that sometimes he should think a bit more about his comments and perhaps aim to have an opinion that is a bit more consistant
so yeah credit where its due what he has done for him self is amazing. my question is, is what he is doing for the ameture photographer actually as good as it could be? im not so sure!!!
vr makes tripods obsolete......... think of how detrimental that information could be to a hobbiest photog just starting out?!?
mani
Well-known
Exactly, he's positioning himself as a sort of 'ordinary joe' whose opinions are not influenced by the large manufacturers - the pose is the typical: "I'm cutting through all the pretentious cr@p and serving up good old-fashioned commonsense, just like grandma used to bake."
And then you read stuff like:
"You have to peer through a separate internal viewfinder to compsoe (sic) and focus, just like a disposable camera. You can't see through the lens."
And this from a guy who *supposedly* recently became a big fan of Leica M film cameras.
It's all just shock-jock populism - get traffic and attention, cr@p on some easy target and praise something popular to get the crowd on your side.
Shameless self-promotion in other words, like a few others have already said.
Andrew Sowerby
Well-known
The majority of folks on here who crow about lazy DSLR users make equally uninteresting images. That's the nature of photography. Most of what most people produce isn't that great. I'm certainly no exception. In the face of that, I find it hard to criticize people for keeping things in "P".
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I saw earlier this weekend that this other expert:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnwf2RShNV0
...thoroughly agrees :angel:
Rprice
Camera Whore
BWA HA HA HA HA! Ken Is a tool. But he is right. The boat was missed on this camera for sure. Old technology in a RF form factor. Im sure a lot will be sold, at least I hope they sell alot. Use the profits to build a more robust DRF if we are lucky. You know when the original came out, I thought for a whole One second about buying one, Then decided not to. I will not buy a DRF until a full frame sensor is out into one. Then and only then will i even think about getting one. But I don't think we will see that any time soon, as PRO use of RF's is not very common at all, and I don't think it will become common even if a FF DRF is ever made.
photogdave
Shops local
What does that have to do with anything?
How much do you thinks pros drive the sales? Not very much...
Rprice
Camera Whore
Honestly I think Pro shooters do drive sales quite a bit to be honest. And the featuers from pro cameras alway trickle down to lower brands because of it. So when the day comes that prows start shooting DRF and demand more from DRF we will see mre DRFs in the market. I