Comments on: FWIW: Ken Rockwell Reviews Nikkor 50mm F/1.4g AF-S

By: bogrod

bogrod — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:35:54 +0000

One of Ken’s most fundemental problems is that he gives opinions on glass that he has never used. He also has a tendency to be overly flamboyant. He seems to have a problem with lenses made in China, but never ever has stated that one of these Chinese-produced lenses, construction-wise, has ever failed on him. But then he’ll also remind you that images are what is important.

I don’t know how or why he became an authority on Nikon gear. I suppose it is because he speaks to the masses, but that alone doesn’t make him worthwhile to listen to.

Anyways, I find it interesting that Bjorn Rorslett said this regarding the barrel distortion of the new 50:

“The barrel distortion, typical for this class of lens, is kept under good control.”

I suppose that this might be a matter of sample variation. But I am going to take Bjorn’s word on this, no Ken “Top Googlesearch” Rockwell.

By: hayesk

hayesk — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 17:16:31 +0000

Give the guy a break. He’s not for photography-nerds who are more into specs than actually appreciating pictures. He’s for amateurs that want things written and explained for them at their level.

matt, the D40 comment has to be one of his comments that is most misunderstood and taken out of context. Perhaps you should ask him what he meant. He must know since he doesn’t shoot exclusively with a D40.

max123, is your sense of self-worth so low that you have to insult him and anyone who reads it. I find his writing interesting, are you saying I have an IQ of 50. You don’t even know me. Get over yourself. If you don’t like his writing style, fine, but having to insult him and his readers is just immature.

Matrix, I enjoy both Bjorn’s and Ken’s reviews for different reasons. Sometimes raw spec numbers don’t tell the story and I want to read actual words instead of just charts and numbers.

By: Matrix

Matrix — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:16:47 +0000

The guy is a complete joke, for lenses Bjorn Rorslett is great, his write ups on Zeiss VERY interesting too.

By: max123

max123 — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:21:53 +0000

if your IQ is around 50 Ken should be an interesting reading for you.
and his “findings” interesting and correct too.

By: matt

matt — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 01:25:57 +0000

conventional wisdom says we should ignore whatever Ken says… His “d40 is good enough for us” remark throws him out of the running for people I look up to.

For me- seeing the difference between performance in a Sigma lens and a Zeiss lens for a Hasselblad was a defining moment and it appears he’d be plenty happy with Sigma-level performance from that remark.

If your pictures don’t mean much to you- feel free to use whatever quality you like.

By: mcspud1947

mcspud1947 — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 22:13:58 +0000

I’m confused by Ken’s report! ( nothing unusual ). Is this a great lens or not? He says it’s indispensible but then lists its shorfalls in no uncertain terms…..