Lens Sharpness

Today Ken Rockwell said:

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry when
selecting a lens.

This seems to conflict with what I read in this ng in other reviews. What
is KR trying to say?

Comments Please.

Oh if you do not like what KR said don't shoot the messenger. I just like
consistency.

measekite wrote:
Today Ken Rockwell said:

He may have said the following (words spoken by him) to the people
around him (or that he's on the phone to):

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry when
selecting a lens.

But, he didn't actually write them.

So if you're referring to today's (14 Jan, 2009) page
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm then that statement
doesn't appear anywhere.
Unless it's been cleverly and invisibly encrypted (which would be called
"steganographic encypherment") into the articles titled "New" (about the
Canon 5D MK2 Vs Lightroom RAW to JPG processing) or "Lightroom 2.2
Upgrade" (about the new version of Lightroom) or "Forums, Posts and
Comments" (explaining why he doesn't have reader comments to articles)
or "Nikon Miami" (a link to a photo gallery).

It would seem that you're putting words into Ken's mouth that weren't
there to begin with.

"dj_nme" wrote in message
...
measekite wrote:
Today Ken Rockwell said:

He may have said the following (words spoken by him) to the people around
him (or that he's on the phone to):

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry when
selecting a lens.

But, he didn't actually write them.

So if you're referring to today's (14 Jan, 2009) page
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm then that statement
doesn't appear anywhere.
Unless it's been cleverly and invisibly encrypted (which would be called
"steganographic encypherment") into the articles titled "New" (about the
Canon 5D MK2 Vs Lightroom RAW to JPG processing) or "Lightroom 2.2
Upgrade" (about the new version of Lightroom) or "Forums, Posts and
Comments" (explaining why he doesn't have reader comments to articles) or
"Nikon Miami" (a link to a photo gallery).

It would seem that you're putting words into Ken's mouth that weren't
there to begin with.


It's in a link from the "Nikon D3X, D3, D40, and Canon 5D Mark II, 5D and
SD700 Sharpness Comparison".
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-sharpness.htm

measekite wrote:
Today Ken Rockwell said:

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry
when selecting a lens.

This seems to conflict with what I read in this ng in other reviews.
What is KR trying to say?

Comments Please.

Oh if you do not like what KR said don't shoot the messenger. I
just
like consistency.

Why do you keep asking questions about Ken Rockwell's comments? If
you asked about photozone.de or dpreview.com or Luminous Landscape or
somewhere once in a while you would look a lot less like a KR sock
puppet trying to raise the click count.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:13:37 +1100, dj_nme wrote:

measekite wrote:
Today Ken Rockwell said:

He may have said the following (words spoken by him) to the people
around him (or that he's on the phone to):

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry when
selecting a lens.

But, he didn't actually write them.

So if you're referring to today's (14 Jan, 2009) page
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm then that statement
doesn't appear anywhere.

IT CERTAINLY DOES. This is a copy and paste from his site.




Unless it's been cleverly and invisibly encrypted (which would be called
"steganographic encypherment") into the articles titled "New" (about the
Canon 5D MK2 Vs Lightroom RAW to JPG processing) or "Lightroom 2.2
Upgrade" (about the new version of Lightroom) or "Forums, Posts and
Comments" (explaining why he doesn't have reader comments to articles)
or "Nikon Miami" (a link to a photo gallery).

It would seem that you're putting words into Ken's mouth that weren't
there to begin with.

You missed it.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:00:14 -0500, J. Clarke wrote:

measekite wrote:
Today Ken Rockwell said:

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry
when selecting a lens.

This seems to conflict with what I read in this ng in other reviews.
What is KR trying to say?

Comments Please.

Oh if you do not like what KR said don't shoot the messenger. I
just
like consistency.

Why do you keep asking questions about Ken Rockwell's comments? If
you asked about photozone.de or dpreview.com or Luminous Landscape or
somewhere once in a while you would look a lot less like a KR sock
puppet trying to raise the click count.

--

But I do and I read their sites as well. But it just seems that either KR
says different things at different times or you need to read between the
lines to get a good handle on what he says. Agree with him or not or like
is motives or not he certainly is a bright guy.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:14:45 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

On 2009-01-14 15:07:15 -0800, measekite said:

Today Ken Rockwell said:

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry when
selecting a lens.

This seems to conflict with what I read in this ng in other reviews. What
is KR trying to say?

Comments Please.

Oh if you do not like what KR said don't shoot the messenger. I just like
consistency.

I think this is what many of us on this NG have been trying to tell you
for some time now.
Your quest for the perfect, sharpest, fastest, mostest everything lens
should be toned down now that Ken has written that it is fine for you
to use a lesser lens.

But there are other articles where he shows examples with commentary that
this is sharper than that etc.



It can be unhealthy to obsess too much on one piece of the photography
puzzle, without considering the whole.

Now go and buy that camera, and it is OK to compromise on your lens
selection now you have Ken's blessing.

measekite wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:13:37 +1100, dj_nme wrote:

measekite wrote:
Today Ken Rockwell said:
He may have said the following (words spoken by him) to the people
around him (or that he's on the phone to):

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry when
selecting a lens.
But, he didn't actually write them.

So if you're referring to today's (14 Jan, 2009) page
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm then that statement
doesn't appear anywhere.

IT CERTAINLY DOES. This is a copy and paste from his site.

Not on today's page.
You must be seeing things.

I went and actually looked.
The words you claimed that he wrote just aren't there.

Unless it's been cleverly and invisibly encrypted (which would be called
"steganographic encypherment") into the articles titled "New" (about the
Canon 5D MK2 Vs Lightroom RAW to JPG processing) or "Lightroom 2.2
Upgrade" (about the new version of Lightroom) or "Forums, Posts and
Comments" (explaining why he doesn't have reader comments to articles)
or "Nikon Miami" (a link to a photo gallery).

It would seem that you're putting words into Ken's mouth that weren't
there to begin with.

You missed it.

I can't miss what isn't there to begin with.
Unless you're referring to some other pages or articles, then you're
just flat out libelling Mr Rockwell.
Provide a link to the page where you read what you claimed to.
It does not appear on the "what's new" page.

measekite wrote:
Today Ken Rockwell said:

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry when
selecting a lens.

This seems to conflict with what I read in this ng in other reviews. What
is KR trying to say?

Comments Please.

Size, convenience, value... maybe you don't ever need big prints.

measekite wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:13:37 +1100, dj_nme wrote:

measekite wrote:
Today Ken Rockwell said:

He may have said the following (words spoken by him) to the people
around him (or that he's on the phone to):

In 2008, sharpness is the last thing about which you need to worry
when selecting a lens.

But, he didn't actually write them.

So if you're referring to today's (14 Jan, 2009) page
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm then that
statement doesn't appear anywhere.

IT CERTAINLY DOES. This is a copy and paste from his site.

Instead of copying and pasting perhaps you should link the page.

snip
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)