SAR and Ken Rockwell

[Green Flash]

I see you have been bothered by Ken Rockwell's off the wall comments in his Arii review. 

 

         Funny, the A7rii is one camera that almost the whole industry including multiple professionals, has stepped back to applaud not only for the sheer mountain of innovation but also for the excellent resulting quality of the camera and images that can be created by it.  Obviously, there will be some things that are not perfect. But overall, wow!!!

         Along comes Ken Rockwell with an opinion not supported in any way by the mountain of favorable comment from professionals, many of whom have been reported on SAR. 

         Personally, I am not a professional photographer.  But I am a fairly experienced amateur.  I doubt that many people of my status or higher would take Ken Rockwell seriously.  But over the past couple of years, the thing that has bothered me about his "reviews" has been the fact that many of his opinionated comments are just wrong, and could very well mislead new photographers into wrong purchases and thus damage the hopefully growing body of people interested in quality photography. For example, today on his site he still makes the statement: "You can pay more for fancier cameras, but no camera takes better pictures than a (Nikon) D3300."  He follows this with a recommendation that the Nikon D7200 is the worlds best serious camera.  Obviously these are both outstanding cameras and can take wonderful pictures.  But they should be sold for what they are.  These statements are so overblown they are not only not true,  they are never true.  Indeed, how much credibility does KR leave himself after joining the paranoid crowd by declaring that more megapixels is just a way for the big bad manufacturers to get people to pay more money...

         Reviewers have a responsibility to the industry and to photographers not to mislead people.  When good reviewers find things they don't like about particular products they should and do point them out and discuss how those factors can make it more difficult to achieve one or another photographic goals.  When new things come out, the reviewers can tell the folks how the new or improved features do (or do not) help them improve their photographs.  But because the circumstance of each photographer is unique,  the final purchase judgement in his or her case is also unique.   Broad brush declarations or slamming of products of the Rockwell sort, just don't help. 

         How should SAR deal with this?  I am not sure.   But I think it is important to not inadvertently give KR any more audience or credibility than he deserves.             

          

[Guest all8]

You don't understand SAR. Quote Ken Rockwell, and lots of people like you get all upset, click the links, see the adds ... which pays for the hosting costs that keeps SAR running. He has a dark and sarcastic sense of humor which is a welcome relief from the Copy & Paste dolts who spend more time on their disclaimers than testing the cameras.

 

There is a chap around here who posts F1 shots, he has to spend lots of time in Post Post-processing to get images that look OK (IIRC). Canon and Nikon using Pro's get JPEG's out of the camera ready to go ... so Ken has a point. Nice camera, but ...

[Green Flash]

                      Actually,  I don't get the point.  I have the A7rii a few other Sony's and many Nikon DSLRs.  Every camera of this complexity takes some time to learn everything from where stuff is on the menues to how the particular camera renders light in a particular circumstance.  Only after you learn this about any particular camera, and get the settings the way you want them to be based on the way that camera shoots,  do you start getting quality shots. 

                      I as an amateur do shoot Jpeg but your description of pros who use Nikons and Canons "get jpeg's out of the camera ready to go..."   Amazing!  No post processing? cropping?  contrast or brightness or color adjustment?  What pros are these? 

                      Maybe they would do as well with the Sony as they do with the others, if they would take the same time to learn the Sony cameras as they did to learn the DSLR systems that have been around for several years.   

                     According to KR, the A7rii is good only for photo hobbyists as KR defines them:  "A photo hobbyist is someone who loves talking about pixels, software, apps, bit depths and especially loves playing with a zillion different brands of lenses on adapters. That's why hobbyists and gizmo fans love this camera so much."    I don't actually know anyone like that.  Do you?   But what Ken is saying: This is a good camera, but only for geeks.   I think he is outside of reasonable standard for reviewers.

                    Actually,  I am a hobbyist as I think most people define it.  I like my A7rii because it takes such great pictures and video.  I like that the IBIS works with my otherwise unstabilized prime lenses, I like that the focus works really well, I like that the dynamic range is outstanding; I like that there are enough outstanding lenses available that lens selection is no longer an issue for me.  I like that when I want it to be small, I can use the FE 1.8 55 zeiss, or the Sony f2 28mm, with silent shutter, and still achieve stellar image quality.  But when I am willing to go larger and still want D810 (or Canon D5s) quality, I can get it using the Tamron f2.8 24-70 with LAEA3 adapter(which works very well with the camera and lens) or the Sony FE mount f4 70-200.   As has been pointed out in SAR repeatedly, many professionals share this evaluation. 

                  IMHO there's the serious possibility some form whom this camera would be a real blessing, are led off track.  That's my objection.

[Golem]

........ There is a chap around here who posts F1

shots, he has to spend lots of time in Post Post-

processing to get images that look OK (IIRC). Canon

and Nikon using Pro's get JPEG's out of the camera

ready to go ... so Ken has a point. Nice camera, but ...

I notice you are comparing "a chap around here" to

"Canon and Nikon using Pro's". You won't convince

me that the need for much post vs the ready to use

[out-of-camera] jpegs is equipment related. Your

sample population of photographers is so hugely

lopsided ["a chap" vs "Pro's"] as to render any

conclusions worse than meaningless.

 

`

[Golem]

........... I as an amateur do shoot Jpeg but your

description of pros who use Nikons and Canons "get

jpeg's out of the camera ready to go..."   Amazing! 

No post processing? cropping?  contrast or brightness

or color adjustment?  What pros are these? .............

What pros are they ? Prolly just typical publication

shooters. Print or online, either or both. Before

digital they shot chromes. Chromes allow no fixes

in the darkroom.

 

So .... the prepress crew got to do all the fixes

during color separation. Replace chromes with

jpegs and very little changes. Prepress still does

all the fixes ... except they have an easier, more

versatile tool kit with which to do so.

 

Working photographers often have no concern for

the stuff amateurs worry about, contrary to popular

mythology of the marketplace. The most typical

standard for working photographers is "good enuf".

That applies to optics, sensors, image files, etc etc.

Sometime "good enuf" means "keeps working after

stepped on by elephant". But not usually.

 

 

`

[Snowfun]

I'm not sure why anyone feels it is necessary to be an apologist for Sony, the A series or any other camera. Most of us do our thing with the (Sony) tools we've got. Most are, I think, happy. Rockwell does his thing. It doesn't impinge on what we do and it's harmless. In my experience people use Rockwell to justify post-purchase their buying decisions - to use the site to decide what to buy is just foolish (cf Bloom's reviews - he always warns people not to buy on the basis of what he thinks).

I quite enjoy reading KR's lens reviews (and have indeed "foolishly" purchased cheap old glass on that basis!) but it makes not one iota of a difference to me how he describes a Sony camera.

Let's ensure that we focus on sharing advice about improving our techniques etc (and this site has some super advice) rather than getting angst ridden about nonsense!

Tim

[mkg3]

You don't understand SAR. Quote Ken Rockwell, and lots of people like you get all upset, click the links, see the adds ... which pays for the hosting costs that keeps SAR running. He has a dark and sarcastic sense of humor which is a welcome relief from the Copy & Paste dolts who spend more time on their disclaimers than testing the cameras.

 

There is a chap around here who posts F1 shots, he has to spend lots of time in Post Post-processing to get images that look OK (IIRC). Canon and Nikon using Pro's get JPEG's out of the camera ready to go ... so Ken has a point. Nice camera, but ...

 

Not just SAR.  KR gets people to come to his site by being controversial driving visitors, resulting in his website rankings and ad revenue. 

 

The fact that you guys are talking about him has helped him and got the exact result he is seeking.

 

 

...these aren't the "reviews you are looking for". Go about your business, move along....

[foto-fanatic]

I think he is pretty funny actually, i like his dry sarcasm and fearless critique, even if its wrong sometimes lol.

You dont have to take everything you read on the net seriously, its your choice, nobody makes you read or agree with anything.

His info on lenses can be very handy as i feel he has quite good opinions on older lenses performance and other info.

[Snowy]

Actually I found his tips on selling on eBay useful a few years ago.

[mikewestern]

https://imgur.com/a/Qzghx

 

Haters have similar mindsets.

[Snowfun]

https://imgur.com/a/Qzghx

 

Haters have similar mindsets.

May I enquire as to whether this is intended as a useful, interesting or entertaining contribution to what was otherwise a relatively light-hearted and harmless chat about KR?