![]() ![]() Yet we all hold these people to be more authoritative than Ken. Ken is no worse than Thom, or Lloyd, or the staff of DPR, or Klaus of PZ, or the guy running TDP, let alone DXO who never post a real photo. But your attack on his credibility, because you think he lacks photography skill, is unfair. Ken is not authoritative at all among enthusiasts at all. Conversely he got a bad copy of the 28-105D and rubbished the lens.well owners of this lens know a properly working copy is an amazing thing to use.but by the time Ken realised this (after getting hold of another copy) his review had already soured people on purchasing it second hand.and besides it wasn't his treasured 18-200. To make matters even worse lense prices have fluctuated based on some of his "reviews".the classic case being the 18-200VR when he talked it up - that lense has never fallen to a more reasonable price. I've definitely seen him admit to doing that before (mid way through the review mind you) but he is always changing his pages so any time I point out something like that someone here calls me a liar. But one of the worst things he does in my view is reviews stuff he's never used. Classic example is his rhetoric that the D40 was all the camera you'd ever want (changes with each low-mid end camera Nikon release so he can drum up sales through his site) and the SB-400 (which in my opinion is a waste of money better put towards a more powerful full feature flash) is all the flash you'd ever want. In some cases he's right - a beginner won't benefit from the better gear - but if they don't try things out (even just in the shop) how can they become familiar with what's possiblle. Not just because it is self-contradictory but because it limits a beginner to a very narrow shooting style and lets them get comfortable with bottom end gear.he just doesn't encourage the photographer to develop a style or experiment - all he does is rubbish high end gear as unfit for the amateur. He's not a terrible photographer but i've called his advice dangerous. I agree with you, but I think you're going to start flame war WWIII on this board with your post because a lot of dpreview forum users think he's fantastic. I think the same reason this guy is popular is the reason the economy crashed.we started listening to people who had no clue what they were talking about. They are fantastic at raising assets and charging a commission when they happen to be right 20% of the time.just like this guy is fantastic at recruiting clicks. It almost reminds me of those entitled wall street guys who lose money and go on and on about how fantastic they are. ![]() Not that a person has to be a great photographer to be a great reviewer, but there is something unsettling about a guy this influential being so absolutely lacking in photographic talent and so authoritative in his tone. Has he won any awards? Has he shot any celebrity weddings? Are his photos published in locations any of us would be impressed by? ![]() I mean, they are pleasant photos for a random guy on vacation, but given the authority with which he writes, I was expecting something out of National Geographic. So to break the tie of whether this guy is just a creative writer or has something useful to contribute, I looked at his gallery. At first, I thought his reviews were helpful, but as I started researching things a bit further, it seemed as if half of what he said contradicted some fact I read somewhere else.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |