Ken Rockwell - A99

[bfitzgerald]

I don't visit his site often (though from time to time)
He has an A99 review (under construction though)

http://www.kenrockwell.com/sony/a99.htm

Some interesting quotes esp about the AF performance

He's also looked at the 50mm f1.4 and 7000 35mm body for some reason.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm

Posting this out of curiosity more than anything. I've not used an A99 so can't comment on that. But whilst I don't always agree with KR, at least he does throw a few bricks through windows. A bit useful than the usual bland brochure reviews or non real reviews like photographyblog or whatdigitalcamera.

[Heidfirst]

Sony must be shifting enough kit that KR wants his piece of the pie too ..
(sorry, but I've probably become as cynical about KR as his reviews are )

[classiccameras]

What review sites do you respect or at least trust in your evaluations.

DPReviews have a good reputation but are known for making mountains out of Mole hills on minor stuff.

I used to like Camera Labs but they are always out of date and lagging behind other sites, and they seem to have given up on Pentax.

Pete

[bfitzgerald]

Most of the mainstream sites are a bit softly softly and worse, problems get through without being noticed (as I know only too well with my own DSLR purchases). DPR well I actually don't take a lot of notice if that site now bar a quick browse, I think they're too inconsistent with their conclusions. They refused to put low battery life as a con on the A99, yet were happy to mention it on the K-30 review "Poor battery life compared to its peers", then bleated out "we feel it's enough for a days shooting" on the forum (a days shooing what exactly?) So I feel DPR is agenda driven they'll nitpick on stupid things like a video button (really not important) then overlook problems that are far more relevant. They put too much on video by far and not enough on the stills side. They also failed to spot QC issues that I found K-r/K-5 esp notable FF issues in some light (no mention) Failed to mention the K-x mirror slap SR issue, not a single word on the D7k's dust/AF problems either (sure maybe they got a good one but to miss all these is worrying) I respect you only get maybe a few weeks with each model, but if I can spot these problems fairly quickly why can't DPR?

Imaging resource are to me more interesting overall, but they give Dave's pick away like sweets at a shop. Neocamera also worth a look (bit different) Cameralabs well never that crazy about them, and the owner seemed to be travelling around letting the site fall behind. Worth a quick look now and then but not much more. Other places like whatdigitalcamera, are as bad online as they are in print "everything is great", photographyblog is just a samples site and press release not a real review site.

As for KR I def don't agree with a lot of what he says, but at least he's enough grunt to actually speak his mind I give that to him.

[Heidfirst]

I don't 100% trust any of the review sites as none of them imo reflects my usage & needs exactly. I therefore pick & choose parts from various sites .
Ultimately I like to go to a shop & have a play - albeit this is becoming harder & harder.
KR ,like most, is opinionated e.g. he likes what I think of as unnatural colour which is fine as long as you know that. His site has become a linkfest over the last year or so & I would say that putting up reviews whilst still works in progress is an indicator of how his site has become monetised.

[bakubo]

Someone a couple of years ago posted a link to some sort of website that gave estimates for income for any website url you gave it. My recollection that at that time KR's site was estimated to make him $500k to $1m per year. I suppose that was based on ad revenue and people clicking through to buy stuff. But, also on every page he solicits direct "donations" so some people maybe give him money. More power to him. "There's a sucker born every minute." It is very hard to believe that he could actually be getting that much from his website, but I don't know.

[bfitzgerald]

I remember that thread, I very much doubt he earns that kind of cash from the site. Though he probably earns enough to keep himself going with his affiliate links and donations. I don't care much for KR's mega pop colour either, and he does say some downright stupid things at times (mixed in with some sensible bits now and then)
Main point is, you don't have to donate or click his links. I do like his no nonsense straight talking at times though.

Reid Reviews is a subscription based review site, I don't care for the model myself but hey it's your money spend it how you want to! Evidently DPR doesn't turn a profit either, esp not with their staff wages bill. Looks like this review game isn't an easy one to earn a living at it. If KR can then I tip my hat a bit to him

[bakubo]

Yeah, he likes to poke at people and he seems to have fun with it. What I enjoy the most is seeing how some people around the internet get so unhinged by him. There are a lot of weirdly neurotic people in the world. Man, he sure does get under their skin! If he can make some money from it then that is fine with me.

[Birma]

I have heard of him, normally as a controversial character. I have never visited his site before and I didn't see anything there that would make me want to go back again. The design of the site is so last century, as they say . I read lots of kit reviews and they all have their places. I think you get to know who and what you trust and what is just noise. I think DK's reviews on the main site here are about as good as they get.

[bfitzgerald]

DK's A99 review was one of his best ever, the problem is he doesn't review stuff that often! (I'm sure he's busy doing the magazine and other things)
Of course if people don't have the time to do reviews, you can send me your Carl Zeiss lenses and full frame bodies and I'll review them for you

KR is clever enough to know being controversial (right or wrong) is a winning strategy for him. I assume he buys stuff to review from what he makes off the site or borrows bits etc etc. There is nothing wrong in that approach, the web is littered with glowing reviews of most camera stuff. I don't mind the odd punch being thrown from KR. He does play things to his own advantage, but that's just being "smart" as the Americans say. No controversy and he'd just disappear into the void of other reviews.

I don't take his site that seriously (there is some useful information there at times) I don't think others should either!