Does anybody agree with this?

[Brendan7]

No. I disagree with it on many levels:

• I disagree with the very idea of anyone reading KR voluntarily. (I do support it as a form of torture for terrorists).
• I disagree with making a post to talk about ideas stated by KR.
• I disagree with linking to KR's web site.
• I disagree with most of the fiction spouted by KR.

LOL

[btaylor]

I don't oftenvisit Ken's website. Mostly because I get all the information I need right here, but also because sometimes after reading his statements I want to give myself an uppercut to the jaw to make the pain stop.


I use a tripod VERY often (when it's not an inconvenience) so I certainly haven't seen the death of the tripod in my photography anyway.


I attempt to use the lowest ISO possible every time I shoot to keep IQ nice. This forces me to use a tripod at times but I don't care. I'd rather have to carry my tripd around to get a shot I'm happy with than shoot at ISO 3200 and never use the shot due to all the noise.

[Brendan7]

I disagree with the very idea of anyone reading KR voluntarily. (I do support it as a form of torture for terrorists).

Daniel, on that note, here's something the CIA should use to interrogate terrorists:


from kenrockwell.com:


"The left handed NikonF100you see on my home page was loaned to me for beta testing in 1998 when Nikon was considering producing a left handed version of the F100. Yes, I also wear my watch on my right arm and if you think I'm kidding just click the image on myContactpage for the original hi-rez film scan where you can see for yourself that it's not just a flipped negative. Nikon decided against producing the camera, but let me keep the beta on indefinite loan as thanks for all my input. (This was long before I started this site.) It of course remains property of Nikon Japan. I may not sell it, although it would fetch a pretty penny in the collector's market. I have to return it to Nikon eventually, and of course when it breaks it won't be repaired. I even had a veterinarian friend in Africa who specializes in elephant care send me some phallus hide from the Loxodonta Africana (known for its flexibility and grip when wet) which I then had a local taxidermist apply to my camera in place of the original rubber. It took a lot of paperwork with the U.S. Dept. of Fish and Game but at least it doesn't peel off on myD1Has the rubber does."





That's right! Ken Rockwell has elephant penis skin on his Nikon F100. 'Nuff said.

[btaylor]

That's potentially the strangest paragraph I have ever read...

[Jon Ruyle]

Ken Rockwell is obviously not deeply in to astrophotography []


Seriously- there are times I think the guy just likes to make crazy statements to see how people will react. Of course IS and newer cameras allow us to take all sorts of handheld pictures we never could before. But to say that tripods are obsolete is just silly.


<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"]

2.) Smaller-than-35mm-format sensors use shorter lenses, which have plenty of depth of field at larger apertures.


<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"]

Yeah but you can always stop down if you have a big sensor. If anything, I would think larger sensors with better light sensitivity would make you need a tripod less often. What the heck is he talking about?


<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"]

Try it yourself. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"]Make
a shot from your 'pod at f/22. Then pick up your tool in your own bare
hands and make some shots at f/8 or wider. Look for yourself. It's
obvious.


<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"]

I'm sure he is trying to make some kind of point here, but I'm not clever enough to know what it is. If you want to see if a tripod is of any use, why wouldn't you compare apples to apples? Why compare f/8 without to f/22 with?

[musickna]

No - not obsolete. Not only are there certain types of shot that require one to get anything approaching decent results (long exposures, panoramas etc.), merely having and setting up a tripod causes you to engage a different artistic aesthetic and one I wouldn't want to give up. Rockwell is always fun - I love his opinionated articles.

[jks]

Most of the time, KR mixes fact with fiction in equal parts.

so i guess he can pass off as Dan Brown of photgraphy equipment????[]

[Chicken]

tripods will always be needing in some sort of way.


what about exposures longer than 1/8th or slower?


i dont think IS nor VR will ever be that good.

[Dallasphotog]

It's really interesting to read the thoughts of someone so utterly clueless. I can't imagine shooting a big event like a country club Christmas Party and hand holding all the portraits. Not to mention the huge amount of time I would waste setting down the camera to adjust a pose and then picking it up and recomposing shots...

[alexniedra]

<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]I Agree. Why even bother telling photographers to "throw away" their tripods? In fact, what is the purpose of that article anyway? Fortunately, I value my tripod and use it very frequently - It will be a very long time before it ends up in the trash. But what type of useful insight is this? What is he trying to prove? What is he trying to teach us?



[i]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]Hang onto your tripod if you're shooting a real camera like a [url="http://www.adorama.com/Refby.tpl?refby=rflAID021866&amp;sku=HSH2D39]Hasselblad[/url], Gandolfi, [url="http://www.adorama.com/Refby.tpl?refby=rflAID021866&amp;sku=LF120]Linhof[/url], Silvestri, [url="http://www.adorama.com/Refby.tpl?refby=rflAID021866&amp;sku=HM21645]Horseman[/url], [url="http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/tachihara.htm]Tachihara[/url], Gilde, [url="http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/seitz-6x17-digital.htm]Seitz[/url], Sinar or even a Wisner, Wista or [url="http://www.kenrockwell.com/mamiya/7.htm]Mamiya[/url], but toss it if you're shooting a popular digital SLR [/i]


<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]Wait, am I shooting a fake camera? I own a Linhof medium format kit - Is that real? [:H]


<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]3.) [url="http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/diffraction.htm]Diffraction[/url]
becomes more significant with smaller format sensors, making smaller
apertures like f/16 off limits because diffraction makes images visibly
softer with today's high-resolution cameras. Compact point-and-shoot
cameras have much smaller sensors, and have no apertures smaller than
f/8 for exactly this reason.[/i]


[i]<span style="font-size: small; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"]5.) Today's digital SLRs'
have spectacular quality at high ISOs, if you're in marginal light.
Shoot at ISO 400, 800 and 1,600 on a DSLR and the results are as good
as slow film used to be.


<span style="font-size: small;"]I really wish real life ISO performance comparisons were provided to back up his generalizations.


<span style="font-size: small; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;"]Sadly many people still look
like idiots using tripods with digital cameras in daylight. These guys
are throwbacks to the 1950s, or the early 2000s.


<span style="font-size: small;"]Need I say more?



<span style="font-size: small; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;"]The-Digital-Picture will always be, in my opinion, the most down-to-earth photography resource on the Web. Honest, concise, clear, and well valuable insight based on observation and real world experience.