For those who don't know who Ken Rockwell is, be thankful. For everyone else... Some sort of masochistic streak seems to drive me to frequent Ken Rockwell's website. He has a sort of village idiot/FOX News appeal to his updates, brazenly shilling random products, using dubious arguments that usually involve disparaging competing products to the point of contradicting his previous claims. His latest abomination is this review of Nikon's 24mm f/2.8D lens. In it, he makes the claim that "It can replace both the 14-24mm and 24-70mm zooms," which is a little suspect because (1) a fixed lens obviously doesn't replace the multiple focal lengths of a zoom lens, and (2) the lens has a design more than 20 years older than the lenses against which he compares it. What does he use to back up his argument? He states, without a shred of evidence, that the 24mm's sharpness is superior to that of the 14-24mm, and equal to that of the 24-70mm. Evidently, he's chosen to disregard Nikon's own MTF curves (24mm, 14-24mm, 24-70mm), which plainly show that he is incorrect. Beyond that, lens-testing websites (photozone.de, slrgear.com) show that the 24mm is not nearly the lens Mr. Rockwell claims it to be, particularly in regard to its performance against the other two lenses. Their actual measurements hold a little more water than his subjective ones. Most irritating is his constant invocation of the word "pro" to lend some sort of legitimacy to his articles. A couple sentences before this: So... every FX Nikon photographer owns/wants the lenses he's criticizing, unless they're pros, who, as everyone knows, don't buy zoom lenses that go below 70mm. Obviously, the 14-24mm and 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses are geared towards amateurs with big pocketbooks (although in a previous article, he says, "Today in 2007 most people shoot with f/3.5-5.6 zooms, and pros shoot with f/2.8 zooms." I guess a lot of things change in 2 years). I don't know if Ken Rockwell is an idiot, or just a conniving liar. In any case, he is definitely a jackass. Rant over.