[Rhubarrbb]

I hardly comment on any Hackernews post, but I had to come here to say if you have any respect for photography and optics in general, you will stay away from that man’s site and remove the link. It’s a joke for a site and well-known as a poor-content, money-grabbing venue in the photographic community.

[Scene_Cast2]

With reviewers, I now first look at the style of shots they take. For example, with Jared Polin, I trust his opinion on sports / action photography, but not landscape, street, or architectural photography. Or for portraits, my go-to is Pye Jirsa.

About Ken Rockwell, I've heard him described as a "black and white photographer shooting in color" - he likes contrast & texture, and generally shoots stuff that would look better in b&w.

[vladvasiliu]

> money-grabbing venue

What do you mean? The site is free to browse and what little ads there are, are unobtrusive.

Content-wise, I personally find his take of not spending time pixel-peeping refreshing, but to each their own, I guess.

[kybernetyk]

Ken is very controversial in the photographing community. He has the audacity to shoot JPEG only (which is a sacrilege for all the RAW shooters). And his writing style is very ... well ... over the top.

I think his site is a great resource if you want to look up older Nikon glass. About the new stuff (mirrorless, etc) ... I don't know ... take it with a grain of salt.

[imagetic]

As a professional photographer who has been linked to Ken many times over the years, I would have to agree with the sentiment that you should STAY FAR AWAY from his blog.

Ken passed his technical prime and photographic abilities many years ago. That website is mostly bad information and should be wiped from the internet archive.