I wouldn't pay too much attention to Ken. Read lots of reviews for sure, just not Kens!
-
-
Thanks Gareth, I have read other reviews and am now in the throws of deciding which lens is best for me. I do think I want the 17-55 as it seems to have everything I need, whilst also being much cheaper than the 24-70.Comment
-
Yes, i'm sure either would be a good choice. The 24-70 seems a little 'long' to me once you factor in the sensor crop/magnification. Another factor MIGHT be build quality.Originally posted by funkydan View Post
Oh, as for Ken, well people can make their own mind up but he seems to ignore so many blatant flaws in lenses that I don't trust a word he says... Could be just me though
Comment
-
Not just you most people think he's a twat.Originally posted by Gareth C View PostI don't trust a word he says... Could be just me thoughComment
-
That's a bit harsh isn't it? Am I missing something here?Originally posted by Ginger Tosser View PostComment
-
Not really...Originally posted by funkydan View Post
In my personal view the problem is that his reviewing is inconsistent to say the least. He highlights flaws in some lenses while ignoring them in others and simply doesn't dig deep enough to give any useful information. On top of that he seems to give strange advice/recommendations. For instance, the 18-200. He makes out its the only lens anyone is ever going to need. I like the lens, I think its an incredible bit of engineering, but it has issues which he shouldn't just ignore. A lot of the problems are obvious to anyone who understands a bit about photography but not to the average punter, exactly the sort of people that would use Ken's site for advice.
On top of all of that he looks an idiot and can't write for toffee
Comment
-
I think Ken Rockwell's site is good for someone who's a fan of cameras and taking pictures, but you really can't take anything he says seriously.
If you're a Nikon user, then http://www.bythom.com/, combined with lens reviews from www.fredmiranda.com will result in a far superior experience.Last edited by Magnakai; 02-10-2008, 13:46.Comment
-
Funnily enough, I looked at those two sites as well Mag! I prefer to get people/user reviews anywayComment
-
I find fredmiranda.com the best site on the web for photography gear reviews, as you say the user reviews are very useful.
Having been in my flat now for over a year, I think it's about time I put some pictures up - any advice on where to get prints done? In particular canvas prints...Comment
-
Managed to get out just before the rain on Saturday for a couple more car shots:
Pete, no idea where to get prints done, sorry. I've got one canvas print but we went to a local printer, was pricey
In retrospect I think all images look better on a proper paper and in a glass frame but that's just me.
Comment
-
Love that second shot Al
Pete, have PM'd you re: canvas print infoComment
-
I *almost* love that second shot Alastair but there's something about it that makes my eyes go a bit funny! I don't know how else to describe it I'm afraid.
Maybe its that the contrast between the background and foreground isn't quite far enough apart.
I love the idea of the black and white black car though!
Though how the heck do you know so many people with nice cars!Comment
-
-
Alastair, you should check out this guy. He's a mate who has very quickly gone from enthusiast to packing in his job and then getting lots of commercial work. He has some great auto stuff...Comment
-
Yes Ish, I agree, don't love it myself so no worries. The contrast is lost at the rear of the car due to dark background unfortunately. I just ask about, car nerds like pictures of their cars taken. Wait to see what I've got lined up in a week or two
Space Monkey, that's great regardless of what it was taken with.
Gareth, thanks for the link, great work he's got. That's the plan but we'll see how it goes.Comment
Comment