D3X

[Nikonfreak]

Good old Ken Rockwell...

I'm not sure he's "in the know" on this one. I'd trust Thom Hogan far more quickly as he usually has some pretty good information.

I'm still going to bet that this baby will be at a higher price point than the D3.

Anticipation....

Julio

[Douglas]

Originally Posted by Nikonfreak

Good old Ken Rockwell...

I'm not sure he's "in the know" on this one. I'd trust Thom Hogan far more quickly as he usually has some pretty good information.

I'm still going to bet that this baby will be at a higher price point than the D3.

Anticipation....

Julio

Yeah. I find it interesting that his images say "not for publishing" and yet you cant even see the model designation.

[Nikonfreak]

Besides, Nikon can easily hide prototype models in plain sight by sticking a 24 megapixel FF sensor in a D3 body... only the shooter would know the difference.

That whole "tape over the brand and model" is silly.

[Jon]

Come on now Julio, go easy on ol' Ken.

Just because he gives reviews on cameras and lenses and flashes without ever having seen them in person doesn't mean he's all wet.

[Nikonfreak]

Some of Ken's stuff is actually quite useful. I don't usually bash him much at all.

There are things you can walk away with and things you should walk away from...

My problem with him is that quite a few folks that are starting out on their photographic journey stumble upon his web site looking for advice, etc.

Ken should be more specific as to when he says things to the effect of not worrying about the more expensive camera body, this is all you'd need ... or this consumer grade lens is better than the top level pro lens.

The optics on certain lenses are good, but there is no "everything you'd need" unless the person is a casual, family portrait or snapshot shooter.

And... as you indicated, it's difficult to review gear you don't own. It's also hard to opine as to gear you don't own or use. You've seen the magazine articles that "pose" as reviews. Basically, you get a reprinted spec sheet on the equipment. Heck, the recent article on the D700 in a mag I rec'd yesterday didn't even mention high ISO shooting....
What about when they try to compare the D3 or D700 to the Canon whatever.... If you shoot high ISO for a living, I don't know that any Canon would or should make the short list over a D3 or a D700 now that I own the D3. There's a strong reason there for event, wedding, or pj shooters to move to Nikon... a really strong reason.

Certainly there are things that one brand is better at than another and the cost is a factor, but arguably, Ken doesn't really take much of these things into consideration and leans pretty heavily to the consumer level equipment pretty often. Maybe he should just specify that's who he's directing the discussion towards.

Julio

[Douglas]

Originally Posted by Nikonfreak

Some of Ken's stuff is actually quite useful. I don't usually bash him much at all.

There are things you can walk away with and things you should walk away from...

My problem with him is that quite a few folks that are starting out on their photographic journey stumble upon his web site looking for advice, etc.

Ken should be more specific as to when he says things to the effect of not worrying about the more expensive camera body, this is all you'd need ... or this consumer grade lens is better than the top level pro lens.

The optics on certain lenses are good, but there is no "everything you'd need" unless the person is a casual, family portrait or snapshot shooter.

And... as you indicated, it's difficult to review gear you don't own. It's also hard to opine as to gear you don't own or use. You've seen the magazine articles that "pose" as reviews. Basically, you get a reprinted spec sheet on the equipment. Heck, the recent article on the D700 in a mag I rec'd yesterday didn't even mention high ISO shooting....
What about when they try to compare the D3 or D700 to the Canon whatever.... If you shoot high ISO for a living, I don't know that any Canon would or should make the short list over a D3 or a D700 now that I own the D3. There's a strong reason there for event, wedding, or pj shooters to move to Nikon... a really strong reason.

Certainly there are things that one brand is better at than another and the cost is a factor, but arguably, Ken doesn't really take much of these things into consideration and leans pretty heavily to the consumer level equipment pretty often. Maybe he should just specify that's who he's directing the discussion towards.

Julio

Yesterday, I was reading a post in the general section where someone was looking for info an a rebel xl. So I went to ken's site to see if there was any info I could link to them. He had a good write up on the D70, so I thought maybe he did something like that for other cameras. And all I read is how much he likes this nikon camera better then the the canon camera.

Its one thing to put that at the end, but to totally front load all that is pretty crummy on his part. Its one thing to be biased, but come on. Give a review, then a comparisson for the consumer to make their own decision

[Nikonfreak]

At the entry level cameras, I think you could flip or flop one brand over the other without any real difference in quality of build or image quality. Both Canon and Nikon make excellent entry and mid level offerings as far as DSLR bodies go.

Of course Canon could come out with the greatest thing since sliced bread but I couldn't afford to change brands because of how much I have invested in gear. When you start really looking at how much equipment is costing on the books, you really don't want to up and spend $35,000 - $50,000 to re-buy into a new brand because you didn't like this little feature Nikon introduced or Canon did that on the latest model so Im jumping ship...

Julio