kevin m
Veteran
Jaap, what is that bottom bird? 😕
Ken Rockwell's "Observation" regarding the M8
- Thread starter navilluspm
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 130
- Views 28K
tomasis
Well-known
very nice pictures, jaapv. it makes sense that leica systems are best in the world , what kaufmann said hehe
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Jaap...Was it you in the Kgalagadi, somewhere in mid-february, sitting in a 4x4 for some time, watching and photographing a damn big vulture standing next to a pond, with feet in the shallow water and ...just checkin'?🙂
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
No. could have been, but unfortunately I was gathering the pecuniae at work for my foray coming Octorber...
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Ken Rockwell replied to my e-mail, thanked me, and has corrected the description of how to use fill flash with a 283.
Now I could feel my comments were worthwhile if I could believe anyone who read Ken Rockwell was learning how to use a 283 for a fill flash. But I am too realistic for that.
Jan Van Laethem
Nikkor. What else?
“Interestingly, the one thing Ken R does make clear on his site is that there is no special new lens or camera which will give you that edge to improve your images, and a good shooter can cut it with pretty much any camera. The only thing is that if he really believes this, why all the M8 interest. His Nikon FE should do the bizz.”
It's really very simple. People click on Ken's so-called M8 review because they like to find out if the camera is worth it's price tag. I doubt anyone reading Ken's website would be interested in buying an M8. Now, when they read that just about any other camera can take good pictures for much less money, they might be interested in buying a Nikon D40 or D60 or any other Canon, Pentax or Olympus in the same price bracket. If they do and buy from the sites that Ken refers them to, that means money for Ken's pocket. Referring potential clients means big money. There is nothing wrong with that, Ken deserves praise for doing what he does from an economical point of view. It's like a car showroom: a manufacturer that has a convertible sports car in its catalogue will put that car in a prominent place, so that people see it and hopefully walk in. Very few people will actually buy the sports car, but it will boost sales of all other car models on offer.
I have done a fair bit of reading on Ken's website and find it contradictary and at times misleading. In several places he says that the camera doesn't matter or the lens doesn't matter, usually right after a review of some very expensive equipment.
It's really very simple. People click on Ken's so-called M8 review because they like to find out if the camera is worth it's price tag. I doubt anyone reading Ken's website would be interested in buying an M8. Now, when they read that just about any other camera can take good pictures for much less money, they might be interested in buying a Nikon D40 or D60 or any other Canon, Pentax or Olympus in the same price bracket. If they do and buy from the sites that Ken refers them to, that means money for Ken's pocket. Referring potential clients means big money. There is nothing wrong with that, Ken deserves praise for doing what he does from an economical point of view. It's like a car showroom: a manufacturer that has a convertible sports car in its catalogue will put that car in a prominent place, so that people see it and hopefully walk in. Very few people will actually buy the sports car, but it will boost sales of all other car models on offer.
I have done a fair bit of reading on Ken's website and find it contradictary and at times misleading. In several places he says that the camera doesn't matter or the lens doesn't matter, usually right after a review of some very expensive equipment.
Last edited:
pvdhaar
Peter
I find Ken Rockwell's site exceedingly refreshing..
he actually helps you in getting the most out of your camera. Not merely by repeating exerpts from manuals, but by really piddling around with each possible setting and custom function and telling what's useful for what and what isn't. Hey, it's even the only place on the web that could explain to me how to create embedded image comments on my d50.. All that for a referall fee that you don't even have to cough up, and you can actually read the sites' content without buying anything? I find it a fair trade..
he actually helps you in getting the most out of your camera. Not merely by repeating exerpts from manuals, but by really piddling around with each possible setting and custom function and telling what's useful for what and what isn't. Hey, it's even the only place on the web that could explain to me how to create embedded image comments on my d50.. All that for a referall fee that you don't even have to cough up, and you can actually read the sites' content without buying anything? I find it a fair trade..
kevin m
Veteran
I can understand why the guy's views are often not welcome on gear-centric forums like this one. "Your camera doesn't matter" and the gear-lust for a $10k kit to shoot family snapshots are mutually exclusive concepts. 😀
Ade-oh
Well-known
Maybe but he's honest. If you look at what he writes about the Nikon D3, for example, he's straightforward about the fact that it's a great camera for sports and news photography but that you can get much better results using medium or large format gear if you're shooting landscapes; or that, in most practical applications, the results from a D40 are indistinguishable from the results from a D200. If he can make a living from his site, good for him.
Arvay
Obscurant
KR has found his niche.
He enjoys Nikon production for free.
Isn't it worth writing idle reviews?
He enjoys Nikon production for free.
Isn't it worth writing idle reviews?
Uncle Bill
Well-known
- Local time
- 3:04 PM
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2005
- Messages
- 1,076
Mr. Rockwell is entitled to his opinion under the US Constitution's First Amendment and to broadcast it far and wide wasting precious bandwidth. It does not stop us thinking he is photography's village idiot and I ignore Mr. Rockwell's deep and profound musings on Camera technology. To conclude Ken Rockwell is an Attention Whore and we fall for it every time.
kevin m
Veteran
"Us?" Speak for yourself.
He's a nice antidote to the gear-addled dithering that occurs on many internet forums.
ampguy
Veteran
I agree
I agree
There are some nuggets on his site, specifically his reviews on the Canon A5xx line, and his recommendation to get a D40 over a D40x or D60. I think the guy has a better understanding of gear, and value, than he's getting credit for, at least in this thread.
I agree
There are some nuggets on his site, specifically his reviews on the Canon A5xx line, and his recommendation to get a D40 over a D40x or D60. I think the guy has a better understanding of gear, and value, than he's getting credit for, at least in this thread.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I'll second that. What a long thread about nothing but it is always interesting to read such threads just to see what new vitriol is out there.
Bob
tightsqueez
Well-known
Had to interject on this one. Call it an impromptu "review" if you may but in the case of Michael Kamber opening his mouth I simply had no other choice. Of course I did... I just thought many of you on here needed to know(not that you didn't already). There is little point to even mention Mr. Rockwell's point of view. First of all, seriously the poor guy is begging for money on his website. It's tough to open your mouth and say anything worth anything if you put a price on it. Secondly, his images. Need I say more?
Michael Kamber is another story. Someone on Flickr emailed me the other day with the link to his review. This is what I had wrote back:
"Just read this so called "war photographer's" review on the M8. I think in his case, regardless of what reward he's put himself in for... I think he'll need the best camera that he can get his hands on. Rarely will I see a photographer break out of that IMAGINED aspect of what war is and what was thought it was beforehand. There is this preconceived notion the usual civilian will have, much like I did long ago that attracted and romanticized me to the point to push me to actually enlist. The real people I have met in life, in all aspects of their interests... do take that extra step and do become a participant.
It's evident that he's pretty much a witness and will become nothing more. The world is full of them. I could care less what the hell he used nevertheless but if you certainly took the words, I, ME or MY out of his conversation, he wouldn't have much to say. I feel pretty much the same way about Nachtwey. There was a day when I once thought guys like these knew combat, embodied it and so forth but some 800 days of real combat myself has changed that idea altogether.
As far as the M8? I can say that I beat mine up pretty good for about a year. It's been dropped about a dozen times from heights, survived 130 degree weather on those sixteen hour days and been there right along with me when I got my bell rung looking for IEDs that couldn't kill me but would have had it been anyone else. Whether that means anything I could care less. It may be be not good enough for someone who calls themself a photojournalist but it is good enough for a soldier."
And the great thing about all of this is how there is no way shape or form pinning me for letting someone or some company put money in my pocket for saying any of it. Leica didn't fit the bill when I went to war; I did. And that's the point to be taken with much of photojournalism today; when you start adhering profit to honesty and the truth of the message, it will always come out wrong. The person who signs the paycheck is the person who should have their name signed under the photograph, not the photographer.
Giving someone credibility simply by saying they shoot for a living is false. Much of you on here have WAY more in terms of that because many of you don't do it for a living. This is precisely why we all frequent such a forum.
One last note. I'm sorry but Kamber ISN'T someone who "gets shot at for a living". When I looked at his images from Mosul, Iraq, I laughed at the fact that I couldn't recognize a city that many of us grew to never forget. Most likely though, which he should attest to is that the Army gave him poor access. It certainly shows.
For those who look my Flickr site, it's all but gone. Plans await for the images and stories I will one day offer to you.
..jAy..
Michael Kamber is another story. Someone on Flickr emailed me the other day with the link to his review. This is what I had wrote back:
"Just read this so called "war photographer's" review on the M8. I think in his case, regardless of what reward he's put himself in for... I think he'll need the best camera that he can get his hands on. Rarely will I see a photographer break out of that IMAGINED aspect of what war is and what was thought it was beforehand. There is this preconceived notion the usual civilian will have, much like I did long ago that attracted and romanticized me to the point to push me to actually enlist. The real people I have met in life, in all aspects of their interests... do take that extra step and do become a participant.
It's evident that he's pretty much a witness and will become nothing more. The world is full of them. I could care less what the hell he used nevertheless but if you certainly took the words, I, ME or MY out of his conversation, he wouldn't have much to say. I feel pretty much the same way about Nachtwey. There was a day when I once thought guys like these knew combat, embodied it and so forth but some 800 days of real combat myself has changed that idea altogether.
As far as the M8? I can say that I beat mine up pretty good for about a year. It's been dropped about a dozen times from heights, survived 130 degree weather on those sixteen hour days and been there right along with me when I got my bell rung looking for IEDs that couldn't kill me but would have had it been anyone else. Whether that means anything I could care less. It may be be not good enough for someone who calls themself a photojournalist but it is good enough for a soldier."
And the great thing about all of this is how there is no way shape or form pinning me for letting someone or some company put money in my pocket for saying any of it. Leica didn't fit the bill when I went to war; I did. And that's the point to be taken with much of photojournalism today; when you start adhering profit to honesty and the truth of the message, it will always come out wrong. The person who signs the paycheck is the person who should have their name signed under the photograph, not the photographer.
Giving someone credibility simply by saying they shoot for a living is false. Much of you on here have WAY more in terms of that because many of you don't do it for a living. This is precisely why we all frequent such a forum.
One last note. I'm sorry but Kamber ISN'T someone who "gets shot at for a living". When I looked at his images from Mosul, Iraq, I laughed at the fact that I couldn't recognize a city that many of us grew to never forget. Most likely though, which he should attest to is that the Army gave him poor access. It certainly shows.
For those who look my Flickr site, it's all but gone. Plans await for the images and stories I will one day offer to you.
..jAy..
navilluspm
Well-known
- Local time
- 5:04 PM
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 434
Thank you Jay: for your Camera assessment and more importantly for your service.
desire
Amateur RFer
Many thanks too Jay, that is an impressive post.
Darren Abate
Professional Shooter
Well... Regardless of what people may or may not think of Kamber, having read his review of the M8, and having used one myself on professional assignment (yes, I do actually earn my living as a shooter, albeit not a conflict shooter like Kamber), I actually agree with what he had to say about the camera itself. I too experienced most of the same problem with the body I had, save the locking up problem. Mine did, however, have a nasty habit of refusing to recognize when it had an SD card loaded, requiring several restarts before it would wake up and see it. My biggest complaints about the camera were the noisy chip, the horrible auto white balance and the nasty green tint it wanted to paste over every shot. When you have to shoot on the go, you don't have time to be second-guessing your camera in order to get it to perform the way it should.
Ara Ghajanian
Established
Exactly! You can bash Ken all you want, but I think the article by the actual war photographer is spot on. I share his opinion on every point he makes about the M8. I owned one and sold it within a month because of all these points. In my opinion, the camera is an insult to all Leica owners. For that kind of coin, we should have a reliable piece of equipment which can record images without so much noise at high ISO's. Part of the Leica tradition is their cameras' abilities to shoot so well in low light circumstances. If any of you think that this camera performs well at anything above ISO 320, then you are lying to yourselves. Mind you, I would never sell my M6 because that camera is a true workhorse. The M8 is a digital paperweight that does not belong in a real photojournalist's hands. Do a side by side with a Canon 5D. I know it's not a rangefinder, but shouldn't a rangefinder perform better at high ISO's?
Ara
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Well, I think we can safely conclude that Ken Rockwell doesn't like using Leicas, whether film or digital. Any opinion as strongly worded as that can be safely disregarded. I can't recall seeing a single instance of an M8 owner reporting he or she was dissatisfied--outside of the instance Rockwell refers to.