Chris101
summicronia
I think Rockwell is one of the few good photo-humorists on the internet. He tells you right up front not to take him seriously. I don't, but he's funny.
I've been trying to read Weeks' uber blog since he started it. I can't seem to get beyond a line or two before the urge to click away overcomes me.
So PDN has a thing for Rockwell? Great magazine. I remember seeing a photo of somebody's messy living room, and the thought occurred to me: "And I'm not rich and famous ... why?"
infrequent
Well-known
@keith - maybe rockwell is an aussie too. most of the time he is taking the piss too! ; )
Matt White
Member
KR does this because he's smarter than us. He makes remarks calculated to offend experienced photographers and camera/brand partisans. And we always bite. His views and links back to his site get posted all over the net and he gets massive numbers of hits, and lots of money from his advertisers. And his site site comes up at the top of the first page of a lot of camera-related Google searches.
Like I said, he's smarter than us.
Like I said, he's smarter than us.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Ok ... I vote we make him an honorary Aussie!
"Sir Ken of the order of the windbag ... arise!"
Gid
Well-known
Well don't get your knickers in a twist Gid ... I was taking the p*ss a little. It's the Aussie way doncha know?
I used to peruse his site regularly back when I first bought my D70s and bought a Nikon 18-200VR lens on his recommendation ... he raved about it and I was gullible.
Actually it's a very good zoom ... I should write and thank him!
Knickers untwisted
monochromejrnl
Well-known
can't agree more.. KR does what most RFF members do, pontificate/critique and compare gear at infinitum, the difference is that KR gets paid for his time, we just waste ours...
infrequent
Well-known
i like him for his nikon fanaticism. and i never take him seriously.
navilluspm
Well-known
What about the review linked in his article?
What about the review linked in his article?
I am not saying I agree/disagree with Ken Rockwell, but I did find the article he refers to interesting. Isn't the heritage of Leica all about being a reportage camera? If so, how does this heritage come in to play with the M8? Does the M8 live up to the high heritage set by older Leicas in the field? According to this photographer (a self proclaimed Leicophile) it does not.
http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_Field_Test,_Iraq/Page_1.html
PS. Notice that Ken, even though he finds Leica primitive, still wants to buy one.
What about the review linked in his article?
I am not saying I agree/disagree with Ken Rockwell, but I did find the article he refers to interesting. Isn't the heritage of Leica all about being a reportage camera? If so, how does this heritage come in to play with the M8? Does the M8 live up to the high heritage set by older Leicas in the field? According to this photographer (a self proclaimed Leicophile) it does not.
http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_Field_Test,_Iraq/Page_1.html
PS. Notice that Ken, even though he finds Leica primitive, still wants to buy one.
Last edited:
Dfin
Well-known
You`ve Killed Kenny, You *******s!!!!! Now for somthing Really Importent Australia leads Ireland 18 to 7 with 10 min. to go
nearog
Nearog
Does anyone here have a mind of their own? Such neurotic and anxious chit chat about shopping.
infrequent
Well-known
@navilluspum - that's a fair point considering leica is claiming that the M8 is meant to carry the M tradition / heritage in a digital context.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
tomasis
Well-known
we still find time to write something about Ken? sure he is famous as Ken and Barbie
S
Socke
Guest
Mind of ones own? What a revolutionary concept! Got any links to Mind review sites so I can find what kind of mind would be best for me and where to get one cheap?
Oh, does it come in black chrome?
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
There is truth in that twisted statement (twisted as in "convoluted", not "evil'). But whenever I read "stuff" like this, I always think whether comparing a segway to a Cadillac Escalade to a BMW motorcycle to a Toyota Corolla is really a good way to make a "mobile" selection. If people feel comfortable driving a Cadillac Escalade in an inner-city park or a segway to climb up a mountain, well...
Nh3
Well-known
Very funny.
kmack
do your job, then let go
I am not saying I agree/disagree with Ken Rockwell, but I did find the article he refers to interesting. Isn't the heritage of Leica all about being a reportage camera? If so, how does this heritage come in to play with the M8? Does the M8 live up to the high heritage set by older Leicas in the field? According to this photographer (a self proclaimed Leicophile) it does not.
http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_Field_Test,_Iraq/Page_1.html
PS. Notice that Ken, even though he finds Leica primitive, still wants to buy one.
Good point, what ever niche the Leica M8 will eventually fill, it will not be as the worn, trusted, and reliable camera in the professional photo journalists bag.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
I must have had about 20 people link me to that review (the Kamber one, not Rockhead's).
I guess, for some folk, the M8 will always be akin to the child that was never "good enough" to be picked to the all star or rep team (regardless of the sport).
Why must every camera be compared to every other camera?
I mean, really, do we do this with, as Gabriel suggested, automobiles?
"Well, the Bentley Continental can't handle the turns in Monaco like the Ferrari F1 car can!!" - it's a ludicrous thing to do imho - they are completely different tools (and so is Ken Rockhead).
I'm no Leica Fanboy but really.... this comparing one camera to another BS has got to stop.
I guess the Leica brand has become such an ethereal legend that has been built up over the decades that everyone automatically assumed that the M8 could, should and would be used by professional photojournalists in war zones.
I wonder if the big mucky mucks at Leica ever considered putting the camera through such a grueling set of tasks.
In the words of Peter Griffin; I think the problem here is that the Leica brand "insists upon itself" . . .
Dave
I guess, for some folk, the M8 will always be akin to the child that was never "good enough" to be picked to the all star or rep team (regardless of the sport).
Why must every camera be compared to every other camera?
I mean, really, do we do this with, as Gabriel suggested, automobiles?
"Well, the Bentley Continental can't handle the turns in Monaco like the Ferrari F1 car can!!" - it's a ludicrous thing to do imho - they are completely different tools (and so is Ken Rockhead).
I'm no Leica Fanboy but really.... this comparing one camera to another BS has got to stop.
I guess the Leica brand has become such an ethereal legend that has been built up over the decades that everyone automatically assumed that the M8 could, should and would be used by professional photojournalists in war zones.
I wonder if the big mucky mucks at Leica ever considered putting the camera through such a grueling set of tasks.
In the words of Peter Griffin; I think the problem here is that the Leica brand "insists upon itself" . . .
Dave
NickTrop
Veteran
C'mon guys, Rockwell is obviously a photography "provocateur". Next to politics, "camera brands" (for some reason) is a great subject for such mischief. That's why he gets so many hits, and everyone here knows his name. The Cult of Leica - obviously, more so than any other brand, is an easy target for provocateurin'. While there is an element of truth to what his says regarding obsolescence, it's an entirely moot point. A minority of drivers prefer to drive a car with a manual transmission (like me). To call a Leica "obsolete" is as irrelevant as saying a car with a manual transmission is obsolete or a spring wound watch is obsolete. There are a variety of reasons why people opt for older technologies - especially ones that put the user in control of the tool instead of outsourcing the decisions along to the fun to a microprocessor, or be battery independent. I won't recount them all. "Obsolescence", therefore is truly relative and subjective.
Since it is subjective (and relative) one can point to Rockwell's weighting of shutter synch speeds as a key criteria for camera evaluation. I agree to an extent, which is why I opt for fixed lens leaf shutter "japanese knock-offs" (from the 60's), which synch flash at all speeds. I might say, why do you need slow, noisey "auto-focus" lenses? Do you have something wrong with your eyes? Are you really that lazy that you can't focus a camera? And, do you really need all this gadgetry to take a simple picture when it doesn't involve "bursting" X number of frames per second? Doesn't it get in the way? Is even a light meter all that necessary, with 15 different "matrixed" areas - whatever? Can't you just compensate by a stop or so for backlighting using your own experienced based judgement? Doesn't this make you a better photographer?
Oh, looks like I fell for Rockwell's provocateurin' (again). Doh!
Since it is subjective (and relative) one can point to Rockwell's weighting of shutter synch speeds as a key criteria for camera evaluation. I agree to an extent, which is why I opt for fixed lens leaf shutter "japanese knock-offs" (from the 60's), which synch flash at all speeds. I might say, why do you need slow, noisey "auto-focus" lenses? Do you have something wrong with your eyes? Are you really that lazy that you can't focus a camera? And, do you really need all this gadgetry to take a simple picture when it doesn't involve "bursting" X number of frames per second? Doesn't it get in the way? Is even a light meter all that necessary, with 15 different "matrixed" areas - whatever? Can't you just compensate by a stop or so for backlighting using your own experienced based judgement? Doesn't this make you a better photographer?
Oh, looks like I fell for Rockwell's provocateurin' (again). Doh!
