Rockwell on Sony 7AR II colors v. Canon & Nikon
Jan 23, 2017 08:25:28 #
jmsail365 wrote:
In Ken Rockwell's review of the Sony 7AR II I came... (show quote)
Of the many photography equipment reviewers out there, Rockwell makes more contradictory and asinine statements than any three put together!
Jan 23, 2017 08:35:20 #
jmsail365 wrote:
In Ken Rockwell's review of the Sony 7AR II I came... (show quote)
That it! I'm throwing my two Sonys into the garbage right now! I'm glad someone told me my Sony pictures were no good.
In the real world, apart from the world where Ken lives, we rely more on fact than generalizations and opinions. No camera takes a perfect picture every time. A lot depends on shooting conditions and the shooter. I used to read Ken regularly. It was largely his column that persuaded me to buy a D90 years ago. As time went on, I realized that his opinions are all over the place. The "best camera ever made" will become a "poor performer" as he continues to write about it.
(Reviews) https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCameraStoreTV/videos
http://cameras.reviewed.com/
http://camerasize.com/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
http://snapsort.com/compare
http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=mainmenu&utm_medium=text&ref=mainmenu
Jan 23, 2017 08:36:09 #
Festus wrote:
Of the many photography equipment reviewers out there, Rockwell makes more contradictory and asinine statements than any three put together!
It's when he goes back on what he said previously that he loses credibility.
Jan 23, 2017 09:36:07 #
Rockwell is also known for writing about his preferences regarding color, which to many of us look over saturated.
Jan 23, 2017 09:39:23 #
I shoot with both Nikon and Sony, but I shoot raw, not jpeg. My opinion differs radically from Ken Rockwell's on the matter of results. Radically.
Jan 23, 2017 11:30:16 #
Festus wrote:
Of the many photography equipment reviewers out there, Rockwell makes more contradictory and asinine statements than any three put together!
Name three, and with specific footnotes.
Me, I'm a fan of KR.
He has saved me tons on money by telling it like it is on many lenses and much other gear.
And myself being open minded and with a full sense of humor, the only other person goofier than he is, for a few laughs is the PhotoShop King.....Scott Kelby, and I enjoy him as well.
Steve at Steves-Digicams isn't bad.
Jan 23, 2017 12:24:49 #
Acufine3200
Loc: Texarkana USA
Read KR's background notes and one gleans he's willing to admit his opinions are, well his opinions. I generally use his reviews as a starting, and work forward. As always, get the instrument in your hands, run it through the paces and judge for yourself.
Jan 23, 2017 13:32:59 #
Kissel vonKeister
Loc: Georgia
jmsail365 wrote:
In Ken Rockwell's
As I Sony owner of the a6300 who has considered the Sony 7ARII I'm wondering what opinions are out there on the UHH on Rockwell's opinion.
As I Sony owner of the a6300 who has considered the Sony 7ARII I'm wondering what opinions are out there on the UHH on Rockwell's opinion.
Ken Rockwell has no worthwhile opinions, just incoherent nonsense.
Jan 23, 2017 13:35:15 #
Kissel vonKeister wrote:
Ken Rockwell has no worthwhile opinions, just incoherent nonsense.
One's opinion Keester!
Jan 23, 2017 13:36:15 #
Kissel vonKeister
Loc: Georgia
imagemeister wrote:
But KR is a "PRO" and does not have time for PP ......?
Right. A professional buffoon.
Jan 23, 2017 14:05:06 #
Kissel vonKeister
Loc: Georgia
Kuzano wrote:
One's opinion Keester!
Opinions are worth about what you pay for them. I don't have many that I can't support; I prefer to be curious and investigate for myself, and having been at it for 65 years now my opinions have been quite fluid. I shoot with Oly (one Panny body) and Nikon and was quite happy until I came across some Fujifilm imagery. They march to the beat of their own drummer with little fanfare, excellent products, and superb customer service (so I'm told). One image that turned my head was this one:
http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_pro2/sample_images/img/index/ff_x_pro2_001.JPG
(Sorry, I just discovered I don't know how to turn that into a link)
I bought a used body and found a new lens at a pawn shop, so now I'm on my way. Image quality seems to be their main thrust; they're weak on video capability and whiz-bang features that cause you to dwell in the menus too long.
I didn't abandon Olympus, Panny and Nikon - I just added. It was worth it.
Jan 23, 2017 14:07:41 #
Kissel vonKeister
Loc: Georgia
billnikon wrote:
His OPINION. Sony lenses use Minolta glass, Minolta glass has it's own character, it is different from Nikon and Canon and under the right lighting conditions it is quite pleasing. But it is different.
Why do they call the Minolta glass Zeiss lenses?
Jan 23, 2017 14:20:50 #
jmsail365 wrote:
In Ken Rockwell's review of the Sony 7AR II I came... (show quote)
In all the years I have been reading Ken Rockwell, his reviews have been on target. I went wrong one time by NOT following his advice to avoid the Nikon P7000. Since I too have an a6300 that I love (Despite minor complaints like the backwards sdcard slot and only a single card) I can't speak for the Sony 7 series. (Rockwell, like most of us, does have his little issues. For years he would advise against RAW and I understand that, if you are trying to have a standard to compare cameras.)
Jan 23, 2017 14:21:50 #
jmsail365 wrote:
In Ken Rockwell's review of the Sony 7AR II I came across these comments:
...
In the next paragraph he writes "while A7RII images look great, its colors never look as great in real-world shots I get
directly from my Canons and Nikons.
As I Sony owner of the a6300 who has considered the Sony 7ARII I'm wondering what opinions are out there on the UHH on Rockwell's opinion.
...
In the next paragraph he writes "while A7RII images look great, its colors never look as great in real-world shots I get
directly from my Canons and Nikons.
As I Sony owner of the a6300 who has considered the Sony 7ARII I'm wondering what opinions are out there on the UHH on Rockwell's opinion.
Who really cares!? I seldom use any picture directly out of the camera. Probably 99% of mine go through Lightroom on the way to a final result so does it make a difference; NO!
bwa
Jan 23, 2017 14:22:27 #
Kissel vonKeister wrote:
Why do they call the Minolta glass Zeiss lenses?
Sony bought out/took-over Minolta's camera and lens manufacturing, patents, etc, several years ago. So, when it is a Sony lens your buying with a Sony camera it's probably a Minolta formula, or at least Minolta derived data. However, I think we're getting far enough from when Sony bought this part of Minolta's business where we're beginning to see in reality Sony engineering/design. Now, as far as Zeiss goes, they have a licensing agreement with Sony and do manufacture some top-of-the-line autofocusing "Tuitt" named line of lenses for Sony. They do still have the Zeiss branding on them I believe...
So, it depends on the particular lens one's buying for and/or with a particular Sony body. Hope this helps you out.
Cheers!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.