(Back to the topic)
I am what one would say partial to Ken's views, and he has been responsible for me having a GAS and a couple of extra lenses that I dont use often. Also majorly responsible for starting me off on the film journey - the easy Fx on film route, for example. But he also has enough non-gear articles, and like every blog post ever, or a series of forum posts like here, they have to be taken with a bit of researching on your own. I would not have known about the ability to use older Nikon lenses on current digital bodies or vice-versa without that website, so many thanks on that count, to him.
*most* of the gear I own, isnt via his recommendations, mind; but there are enough other useful information on his page and as Omaha pointed out, he does mention that gear doesn't matter.
And I got a really really useful tip off him on buying goods on ebay, bidding at the last minute etc., - not enough information on *that* elsewhere.
I do not understand why people go hyperbole on him, if there is a reason to go hyperbole, it as at the dearth of (useful) camera reviews elsewhere, instead there are millions that seemingly put a score to every damn thing and rate them out of 5 or 10 or a billion stars. Most (all?) of *those* reviews are shit compared to a chap expressing an opinion. I would rather read a "review" where a person goes, "Hey, this is my opinion" (and the obvious, go read a bit more blah blah) than a review claiming objectivity and saying its 8.5 out of 10 stars.
Let me illustrate, I was the first in my entire circle of friends and family to buy a digital SLR - back when the idea hadn't even caught on here and the 2nd generation DSLRs were only starting to be announced(now there are more DSLRs than idiots around). I went nuts trying to compare what I had to buy, every review said each camera had one extra feature compared to another. One thing I remember vividly was a review saying X camera (Pentax or Olympus?, dont remember) was better because it had sensor cleaning - which was obliterated by another that said just blow the dust off.
I got lucky that I was in Japan then and could actually go and shoot each of the cameras - in a store, sure, but I could compare each of those I was trying to buy.
And the one I went with was that one that felt most natural to use - and imho that is still the best reason to buy. It is one reason I prefer a manual film camera over a digital film camera over an automated film camera. Sure, horses for courses, but get that out of a review that says 8.75 out of 10 stars.
I since recommend doing that to people who ask me for a recco, but most people still want to compare the 8 out of 10 stars some idiot website gives them OR I get told they *need* a (d)SLR when I recommend that they use a Micro4/3rds/Mirrorless cos its more compact!
On film, I think its gotta do with new range of Instant cameras that are around and of course Lomography. Of course, not every one wants to process film, or own a darkroom, the digital convenience will still rule (where everything needs to go on FB/Instagram instantly), but I reckon the "wow" factor of having a print just handed out would rule - recently, My brother and his friends(all ~20-22) were wowed when a restaurant offered them a digital print of an evening out!