Why do people laugh at itty bitty lenses?!

RobV

Senior Member
I can think of a few four letter words to describe him. Guru certainly wouldn't be one of them!
I am a newbie that has been bitten by the Rockwell bug.
I was warned early off.
Ken Rockwell is the Haynes manual for Seventies era airhead BMW motorcycles.

Don't forget your supersize order on that grain of salt.

These forums are a much better source of information.
 

D200freak

Senior Member
Ken's site has its uses. It has the virtue of being extremely well organized. It's impressive in that respect, you have to hand it to the guy for that if nothing else.

But it's not wise to take the verdict of any single reviewer as gospel. I take his opinions into account, but I check other sources as well and try to find a consensus.
 

Pe11e

Senior Member
I must add something, although it's not completely on topic. When I'm posting my short films on some dedicated photo forums, and when Canon guys see that I'm filming with my Nikon D5100, they start to "laugh" at it, followed by "Canon rules for video, throw that Nikon to garbage!" and stuff. First of all, I have a custom firmware that unlocks manual Aperture/ISO control in movie mode, so I can film at 1/50 shutter speed, at F1.8 or whatever. But apart from that, one thing is most important for me, and that is the video quality! I'm currently working on a pretty serious project, filming a promo film for one academy here in Belgrade, and they are VERY impressed by the current captured material and the video quality. So, it's absolutely not important for me (or for 90% of the clients) if the film is made with Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Sony or whatever, only the quality counts!

BTW I always hated Canon vs. Nikon discussions, waste of time.
 

D200freak

Senior Member
Agreed. Canon and Nikon are highly competitive with each other and both make fine products. I see no reason to put one down in favor of the other. I'm just more familiar with Nikon products, but if I'd gotten started with the Canon equivalent of the D200, I'd have sought out more Canon equipment, given how I usually do things. I suspect the day will come when I have both and have good things to say about both.
 

RobV

Senior Member
Ken's site has its uses. It has the virtue of being extremely well organized. It's impressive in that respect, you have to hand it to the guy for that if nothing else.

But it's not wise to take the verdict of any single reviewer as gospel. I take his opinions into account, but I check other sources as well and try to find a consensus.

Yeah, he sucked me in with his organization! :)
 

SkvLTD

Senior Member
Ken's site has its uses. It has the virtue of being extremely well organized. It's impressive in that respect, you have to hand it to the guy for that if nothing else.

But it's not wise to take the verdict of any single reviewer as gospel. I take his opinions into account, but I check other sources as well and try to find a consensus.

Funny enough I had to shoot a 10k today ONLY in small JPG, using strictly A-wesome mode albeit with min. shutter of 1/640 mandatory. Why in heck they don't allow manual with same old auto or not ISO no one knows, but that's how the company must Ken it.
 

pforsell

Senior Member
Ken's site has its uses. It has the virtue of being extremely well organized. It's impressive in that respect, you have to hand it to the guy for that if nothing else.

But it's not wise to take the verdict of any single reviewer as gospel. I take his opinions into account, but I check other sources as well and try to find a consensus.

Rockwell's site is pretty disgusting, for example:
Anal Probe
AnalProbe.org

Poor guy. And I left the juiciest links out because of their content. You'll be able to find the really demented material yourself.
 

Daz

Senior Member
Ken's site has its uses. It has the virtue of being extremely well organized. It's impressive in that respect, you have to hand it to the guy for that if nothing else.

But it's not wise to take the verdict of any single reviewer as gospel. I take his opinions into account, but I check other sources as well and try to find a consensus.

I can never use his "Review or Opinions"... Anyone who things "P" stands for "Pro" mode needs their head examined !!
 

Just-Clayton

Senior Member
Shot pictures at my nieces benefit. Nothing fancy, just snapshots. I brought only 4 batteries for the flash. So. due to the very high ceiling decided to lower my flash power and shoot straight on. A woman came to me and asked why I'm shooting flash head on and not bouncing it. Explained my battery situation. "Well" she says. With my canon 70-200/ 2.8 $2000 lens I get great shots. So, to put her in her place I shot at 1600 ISO with my 70-300/4.5 antique and "FREE" lens. I walked over and showed her what my shabby old equipment did and said " not bad for a free lens huh"?? Funny!! Never said anything to me after that.
It doesn't matter how expensive lenses are. It's how it's used. Half of my lenses are manual and my newest ones are around 10 years old.
 

Woodyg3

Senior Member
Contributor
Rockwell's site is pretty disgusting, for example:
Anal Probe
AnalProbe.org

Poor guy. And I left the juiciest links out because of their content. You'll be able to find the really demented material yourself.

Those are a joke, not to be taken seriously.

I can never use his "Review or Opinions"... Anyone who things "P" stands for "Pro" mode needs their head examined !!


Also a joke that is not to be taken seriously.

Old Ken may have some strange notions, and I certainly don't agree with all his advice or reviews, but he has an interesting sense of humor, at least.
 

salukfan111

Senior Member
Well you should see the looks I sometime get when I am shooting with my 50mm 1.8D You can actually see lips curl up in some instances. But the freedom of movement that this lens gives me is worth the disdain. Of course they won't actually say anything to me because i am somewhat intimidating person. You have to use whatever lens gives you the results you are after Because "you can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself"
Show up at a birder meet up with a 300 f/4.5 if you want to see some nasty looks. There are a lot of f'ing gear whores out there. They usually don't say much to me because they need me to explain how to get their cameras to shoot well in low light in the woods.
 

salukfan111

Senior Member
I shot with a d3100 and an 18-55 lens for a long time. Never have I encountered anyone laughing at my gear, or gotten so much as a strange look from anyone during that time.

I don't know where you guys are shooting at that you're getting so many strange looks.:indecisiveness:
I gave me 18-55 vr to my dad (older can't hold very steady anymore) and it seemed ok. I really like the older 50mm pancake lens too. Nothing wrong with tiny.
 

pforsell

Senior Member
Show up at a birder meet up with a 300 f/4.5 if you want to see some nasty looks. There are a lot of f'ing gear whores out there. They usually don't say much to me because they need me to explain how to get their cameras to shoot well in low light in the woods.

Gear whores come in all kinds of varieties. Last summer I was shooting engagement photos of a couple in the city park by the river. Nice sunny morning, nobody there but the couple and me and I was getting a few facial portraits with D4S and 200 f/2 VR2 and I deliberately shot into the sun and used SB-800 and a brolly to open the shadows on their faces. Backlit long blonde hair on the girl... mmm if I was 20 years younger... :eek:

Anyway, some guy climbed up the river bank with a smallish superzoom in his hand (they are good for bugs, admitted!!). He was probably shooting dragonflies or something, didn't ask. Anyway, he laughed at me and said "isn't there enough light for portraits, ditch the flash it makes ugly faces. Or get one of these modern ones" and he pointed at his camera.

The moral of the story: no matter if you are out with a small lens or a big lens, there is always someone who thinks he knows better and finds a reason to laugh at your gear choice. :cool:

Just use the gear that gets the job done and disregard passers-by.
 

SkvLTD

Senior Member
Gear whores come in all kinds of varieties. Last summer I was shooting engagement photos of a couple in the city park by the river. Nice sunny morning, nobody there but the couple and me and I was getting a few facial portraits with D4S and 200 f/2 VR2 and I deliberately shot into the sun and used SB-800 and a brolly to open the shadows on their faces. Backlit long blonde hair on the girl... mmm if I was 20 years younger... :eek:

Anyway, some guy climbed up the river bank with a smallish superzoom in his hand (they are good for bugs, admitted!!). He was probably shooting dragonflies or something, didn't ask. Anyway, he laughed at me and said "isn't there enough light for portraits, ditch the flash it makes ugly faces. Or get one of these modern ones" and he pointed at his camera.

The moral of the story: no matter if you are out with a small lens or a big lens, there is always someone who thinks he knows better and finds a reason to laugh at your gear choice. :cool:

Just use the gear that gets the job done and disregard passers-by.

Gotta love those "natural light because they don't really understand light" folks.

I recall from years back a guy who had a contract to shoot for local branch of art shows, who at the time had 3100 while I had 5100 and slightly better glass, and while he had the job and I didn't (not that it was honestly worth it) his shots were super-bland. Had he better gear/post, perhaps his work would've been better by default, but alas.
 

rocketman122

Senior Member
The late Galen Rowell made a career and a handsome living with the ridiculous $50 plastic fantastic AF Nikkor 28-80/3.5~5.6D.

Rowell's site:
Mountain Light Photography | Galen and Barbara Rowell |*Fine Art Prints, Photo Workshops, Stock Photography

Get the lens:
Nikon AF Nikkor 28 80mm 1 3 5 5 6d with Nikon Cap NR | eBay

If you're good, you can make any lens do what you want.

ANY lens is great stopped down.


One phrase comes to mind, it's not the size of the lens but the magic it creates....couldn't resist.

It's not hardware that's for sure, it's the operator.

Almost completely true. the gear will hold back a great photographer. I take crap photos with a smartphone. but give me an 85mm and a low light camera like D3s and Ill do some killer images.


I'm a newbie to photography (on a level beyond setting it to AUTO and just clicking away, anyway) but even I know that a long telephoto lens is the wrong choice for taking photos of things that are within a few feet fo you. What's WRONG with people? OK, granted, my Tamzooka lens will focus in amazingly close, all things considered, but that doesn't make it the right lens for photographing what I'm standing on!

I honestly think some people just like to show off their biggest and most expensive lenses. Making great photographs is not what they're there for. I'm perfectly happy to use my tiny 35mm f/1.8 prime lens if it's the right lens for the photo. And if it's for a portrait at "in this room" distance, it probably IS the right lens to use.

that would be incorrect. an 85/105/135/70-200 would be the choice of pros for sniping people at the reception at weddings candid style. anything below 85mm and you stand too close to frame, which alerts them that youre there. but step 10 feet away and use an 85 and capture fantastic images w/o them knoowing. better isolation, better compression, better aesthetics.

I am a newbie that has been bitten by the Rockwell bug.
I was warned early off.
Ken Rockwell is the Haynes manual for Seventies era airhead BMW motorcycles.

Don't forget your supersize order on that grain of salt.

These forums are a much better source of information.

not true. ken gives a lot of great technical info. he gives crap info about photography though. I dont agree with what he says regarding jpeg but im against photogs who use raw because they suck at getting it right in camera. like WB. those who say, ill shoot in raw and fix it later and shoot awb instead of manually adjusting when you know the lighting is very problematic yet trust the camera to decide for you and it wont get it right and will make all your indoor images really yellow. if you shoot it well in jpeg in camera then thats photography skill.

I will agree 1000% with @[COLOR=lime ]SkvLTD[/COLOR] if you dont know how to use flash, you can never be a great photographer. not because youre great at using the flash but knowing how to use flash teaches how to see light. when youre experienced enough to see the flash hitting your subject, then youve been shooting quite a while. its like learning to use primes and getting your composition by walking around and learning to frame properly. understanding perspective and compression. those who stand int he same spot right in front of the person and goes WA can never be great. I shoot family formals with my 85mm prime. I go back and forth for every shot. full body/half body/face..even full body group shots.


@boofhead I see many relatives and friends who shoot with the cheap kit lenses and lower end bodies in weddings all the time. ive also seen amateurs who have money and buy high end. if one is a decent photog the higher end gear will help get better shots. its better AF, better low light, better optics, brighter VF with fast lenses. I dont say anything to amateurs who shoot with kit lenses (18-55/55-200-300) but usually people who are looking to advance their photography skills do want better gear and buy it.

my partners daughter has the kit lens. shes learning photography at school. shes 17 now. after a year she realized what crap her lenses are and wants to advance her skills and realizes te glass holds her back. I let her use my different lenses in the past and she saw what she was missing.

it happened to me as well. when I started I shot all sigma EX 2.8 "pro" zooms glass. I didnt think it was reasonable to pay so much for nikon 2.8 zooms. it was really expensive. a year later or so I received an offer to buy a used beater 85 1.4 AIS lens. after mounting and shooting with it and seeing a few test prints I did, it was a day I remember WELL. it was years back and it made a huge impact on what I thought was good. I realized all my sigma 2.8 "pro" glass is just CRAP! its crap, its garbage. when you start you think your images are good. people give compliments to encourage. I had that as well. then I shot with the lens and realized that my images can never be great. I also saw other pros portfolios and I was sad depressed and my ego deflated completely and had to rebuild myself. then my expensive battle began. I converted to all nikon glass. I dont know what gear you have used, but if you have never used pro gear before, dont try it. it will leave your pocket very light, get you in debt, get you in quarrels with your partner and possible hardships because of it. and im not kidding.

once you own and shoot with pro gear (assuming your skill levels are good enought to take advantage of it. and I mean this by holding it well and focusing well, because it isnt a given. they are heavy and have a learning curve) you will realize why others look down upon those cheap lenses. I laugh at her POS kit lens which ive repaired the plastic POS mount for her-TWICE! last time was saturday this past weekend. I bought the mount off ebay. I actually bought 3 of them so I wouldnt wait on one to come in fast. if you have 3 coming, 1 will come in faster than the others.

now I dont know if your photos were better than the hired pro but photography is a matter of taste and truthfully tell I see to decide, its hearsay to me. and I dont judge on style. I just on technical and creative angles. but if hes a somewhat talented photog, and he knows how to use them to his advantage like bokeh compressing then his images will be better. but again, till I dont see, I cant say. but you do seem to take it personally and you shouldnt.
 
Last edited:
Top