D600, D800, and D4 all the same insides - Ken Rockwell

Phillydog1958

Senior Member
I'm sure there are some similarities between Nikon's big-three, full-framed cameras. I vaguely recall reading something about a sharing of sensors, but i'd love to know what and who his (Ken Rockwell) sources are. He's probably somewhat accurate, but he often has a bad habit of utilizing broad, sweeping statements to support his claims. This current claim makes Rockwell appear to almost be a conspiracy theorist. He makes it sound like Nikon is pulling a fast one on the consumer and that he's the only one in the world who has figured this plot out. You have to take what he says, with a grain of salt.
 
Last edited:

eli

Senior Member
Yes, Rockwell is currently bashing the 600 and 800 when comparing these to their respective competition: Canon 6D and 5D mark iii, even
to the point of arguing that the 6D is a better camera than both the 600 and 800. Meanwhile, he seems to be taking a lot of pictures with his iphone. I am not a Rockwell basher or fan. I merely want information about the 600 oil/dust spots, whether the problem is still
appearing in newly manufactured 600s, and whether that camera has a greenish tint as Rockwell claims. Also, i want to be sure that the
39 focusing points work well with the full frame sensor and expanded area in comparison to a cropped sensor like the 7000. However, having said all that, i cannot imagine that the Canon 6D is without some of those focusing concerns as well given the 11 focal points of the camera. I think it is fair to compare the D600 and the 6D, the D800s and the 5DMark iii. Otherwise, the comparisons are not methodologically correct. Any news on the "greenish" tint, the focusing points and area, and the oil/dust spots discussed as being the 600s only shortcomings? I hope that these are minor issues and go away since i want to trade up without selling all my gear to go to Canon!
 

Sambr

Senior Member
Yes, Rockwell is currently bashing the 600 and 800 when comparing these to their respective competition: Canon 6D and 5D mark iii, even
to the point of arguing that the 6D is a better camera than both the 600 and 800. Meanwhile, he seems to be taking a lot of pictures with his iphone. I am not a Rockwell basher or fan. I merely want information about the 600 oil/dust spots, whether the problem is still
appearing in newly manufactured 600s, and whether that camera has a greenish tint as Rockwell claims. Also, i want to be sure that the
39 focusing points work well with the full frame sensor and expanded area in comparison to a cropped sensor like the 7000. However, having said all that, i cannot imagine that the Canon 6D is without some of those focusing concerns as well given the 11 focal points of the camera. I think it is fair to compare the D600 and the 6D, the D800s and the 5DMark iii. Otherwise, the comparisons are not methodologically correct. Any news on the "greenish" tint, the focusing points and area, and the oil/dust spots discussed as being the 600s only shortcomings? I hope that these are minor issues and go away since i want to trade up without selling all my gear to go to Canon!

I bought one of the early D800's when they were first made available, mine did not have the focus issue but it does have the "green tint" at first it bothered me but now after 4300+ clks it's a non issue. The captures do display any greenish tint as for determining white balance on the monitor on my D800 I just "zoom it a bit" the grren tint is gone. I shoot RAW so white balance really isn't an issue. The D800 is an unforgiving camera - it demands that you know what you are doing - doing so it will reward you with spectacular images. The D700 was / is different. You really have to mess up bad to blow an image with a D700 or a D4.

For someone getting into this game buy a D3200 or D5200 you will have more fun and more "keepers" than if you laid down big bucks for a D800. You can always upgrade down the road.
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
Ken Rockwell is a self-documented moron.

Of course different camera models share some of the same innards. To anyone who has completed the 6th grade, this isn't a revelation. The assembly line process has been around since the invention of the cotton gin.

This is just another one of his attempts to sound like a leading authority of something other than being a jackass.
 

Sambr

Senior Member
Moron or not he is his net worth:


estimated worth,
$ 2,188,417


WOW Score for kenrockwell.com : 4.92 out of 5

98 / 100 WOW Score




Daily Visits: 147,082
Daily Pageviews: 676,577
Daily Revenue: $ 1,015

Monthly Visits: 4,412,457
Monthly Pageviews: 20,297,302
Monthly Revenue: $ 30,450

Yearly Visits: 52,949,482
Yearly Pageviews: 243,567,619
Annual Earnings: $ 365,400

Guess who is laughing at who :) :)
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
I'm still laughing.

First, there's the ridiculous haircut of his. Then there's all the dolts who made that possible by "helping support his growing family." Instead of a $5 donation, people should be sending him condoms. Apparently Ken doesn't know what causes that either.
 

Sambr

Senior Member
However while you are laughing he is driving an Aston Martin and saying " thank you lord for those dolts" that send me $5.00 or more. While you are splitting a gut laughing he lives Southern California in one of the best places on the planet. No I don't like him or listen to his so called advice & rants. But I do admire his talent to make $300k ayear for doing nothing. How may jobs do you need to book to make that much?
 

Rick M

Senior Member
The sad thing to me is he could continue to make a fortune off the unknowing and do an about face, but he chooses to continue all the mis-information. He could very easily remove all the falsehoods on his site and actually offer good advice and still make a fortune.
 
Last edited:

Browncoat

Senior Member
If your measure of success is based on what kind of car you drive, how many zeroes are attached to your income, or which exclusive neighborhood you live in, then I feel truly sorry for you.

Ken Rockwell is a con artist preying on the photography community, nothing more.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
As much as I don't agree with everything this gentleman writes about, I've read things that made sense.

What I don't understand is what can be gained by publicly bashing him. To me, every time his name is written in a forum on the net, he probably gets something in return. I'd just ignore it if you really don't like him.
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
What I don't understand is what can be gained by publicly bashing him.

Think of it this way, Marcel:

Ken Rockwell is a gatekeeper. He is one of the main points through which many newbies must pass to enter into the realm of photography online. Proof positive of this: his site ranks #1 for a Google search for many related topics. This is by design. I won't go into the gory details of SEO (Search Engine Optimization) here, but it should suffice to say that KR has positioned himself that way intentionally. But why?

To the novice, he comes off as a lovable goof, like the quirky neighbor on some sitcom show. His site is massive, and on the surface, appears to be chock full of valuable information. People follow his sage advice, probably even clicking a few links to buy his recommended gear or even opening up their wallets for a donation. As time goes by, a lot of these newbies will gain their own experiences by actually shooting and many of them will be satisfied. But there's also a good portion of them who won't. They will get frustrated and wonder why their photos aren't turning out. Wondering why they've spent thousands of dollars on gear and none of it seems to be working for them. Those people will eventually find there way to better sources...like Nikonites.

How many people have signed up here, and within their first few posts mention Ken Rockwell? A lot. "That's not right, I read X on Ken Rockwell's site" or "I've been using Ken Rockwell's setup guide for my camera". How many times are they dead wrong? A lot. And it's not just here, it's all across the web. It's everywhere. The man is an epidemic.

He advises that tripods are bad, camera bags are worthless, small DSLRs are the same as their bigger brothers, and by God if you fall for the marketing schemes of big bad camera companies you're an idiot because Ken Rockwell says so. There is an endless sea of tripe on his site like this. That's just the gear-related stuff, don't even get me started on how he advises to actually take photos. He's been "shooting seriously since he was 5 years old" and can't even take a decent photo of his children. And why? Why can't a guy with his supposed experience and plethora of gear take a decent photo? Why can't he offer good advice? Why why why?

The answer is simple, and can not be ignored. Should not be ignored: Ken Rockwell has no real interest in photography. Any photo he takes is meant to be put on his site with the intent of panhandling. I seriously doubt that he even enjoys it. And THAT is why so many people dislike him. It's plainly obvious that his goal is not to turn budding newbies into photographers. His goal is to make money for himself. His site contains over 40,000 paid links. FORTY THOUSAND! That's not including the multiple attempts to get visitors to click his PayPal donate links on each and every page.

I'll use Rick (AxeMan) as an example. He's a former Rockweller. He found no use for the guy and came here. Look at some of Rick's stuff from 1-2 years ago compared to now. He has grown by leaps and bounds. He's won multiple photo contests. He's taken and offered advice and has come away a better photographer for it, and there are many others who have as well. I don't know of a single person who has grown as a photographer by following Ken's advice. Not a single one.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
I agree with you about him and what he does or does not do for photography. What I don't understand and question is why you think that you can change this with just bashing him here. I don't see what good it does and I don't see it as doing you any good either. I personally am very suspicious of someone who bashes others in public. This is what I don't understand about your campaign against him.

I only wish we could avoid writing about him on this forum.
 

Browncoat

Senior Member
In addition...

Whether you agree with what was posted above or not is irrelevant. My intent with that (and every) post is to be a helpful part of a community. Yes, I freely admit that at times I post provocatively in an effort to spur discussion. Those who know me well enough behind the scenes already know that. The point is, I'm passionate about photography, which is evident in the vast majority of my posts here. My anti-Rockwell efforts extend far beyond Nikonites.

If I were always trying to sell you something, on the other hand, my posts would look a bit more like this. I might even stoop to the level of using my kids as a device to get you to send me more money.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
In addition...

Whether you agree with what was posted above or not is irrelevant. My intent with that (and every) post is to be a helpful part of a community. Yes, I freely admit that at times I post provocatively in an effort to spur discussion. Those who know me well enough behind the scenes already know that. The point is, I'm passionate about photography, which is evident in the vast majority of my posts here. My anti-Rockwell efforts extend far beyond Nikonites.

If I were always trying to sell you something, on the other hand, my posts would look a bit more like this. I might even stoop to the level of using my kids as a device to get you to send me more money.

The way I feel is that you are trying to sell your hate against him. Maybe this is what is bugging me after all since he hasn't done anything against me so far.
 

Sambr

Senior Member
Anthony give it a rest. People are not as stupid as you think. You are demonstrating so much jealousy and arrogance that you come off worse than your intended victim. If you are as passionate about photography prove it show us. I don't care what your're like behind the scenes, what matters is how you act here.
 
Top