Based on that, with the above image, he would report the rumor and add “This alleged D400 image is obviously a photoshopped version of this D300 image. Decide for yourself whether it is credible anyway.” That would mean no prejudice, and the entertainment value would be the same, but the information value would definitely be hither than that of your post.

Given the choice between these two blogs, which would readers prefer? You have to keep in mind you’re not offering a product that is particularly hard and/or illegal to copy … this is why I think that, in the long run, your strategy is not the best one.

But I’ll shut up now. It’s your site, I made my point, no sense in repeating it!

– snorri

http://74.125.39.100/translate_c?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http://product.pconline.com.cn/dc/nikon/295807_detail.html&prev=hp&usg=ALkJrhhd0SDp5BlZ6UvitOyFOGYzMr1f_Q

Yes some people enjoy credible rumors while others enjoy just about anything but this site is moving in the direction of “just about anything”. If that is what the admin and other people want, fine with me but to make it a more credible rumor site the admin will have to at least see what is obviously fake and what is not.

I’m not asking for investigative journalism, mind you. But it’s really so simple to debunk these fake images that it really hurts the reporters reputation when he reports them without pointing out there’s obviously a 99.9% chance they’re fake.

I’m not “sh*tting on the admins head”, as someone put it rather bluntly (I assume that was aimed at some other poster). I’m glad this site exists. But the way I see it, it should exist in a way that we can point noobs here to show them how to deal with this sort of information, so the senseless rumor threads on dpreview dry out. The way it is now, this site _creates_ senseless rumor threads in forums: Any time one of these pics is posted here, you can bet it will be a matter of minutes before someone will have posted it there. Sure, the backlinks create traffic on nikonrumors, which is fine when you have sponsor banners. But in the long run, it affects how people see this site. It is already becoming hard to take it seriously.

If I want rumor discussions in the form they work here, I can stay on the dpreview forums without missing anything.

– snorri

In addition to that, as was pointed out by Juergen above, sometimes even the official photos are photoshopped, so even the TinEye check may not be valid.

Enough is enough. Please at least act like adults, we don’t find you amusing.

You’re argument comparing this site to a newspaper is fundamentally flawed because, and get this, you’re comparing this site to a newspaper. This site and a newspaper are only tangentially related in respects to their main objective and the kinds of things they do. This site is entertaining to me. You know why that is? Because it’s entertainment. If I wanted Nikon news then I’d go to Nikon for it.

This is, and I don’t know how many times someone has to say this, Nikon Rumors. Not, Nikon Accurate Predictions of the Future.

I’m not sure why you think the admin doesn’t already sort through a number of plausible or implausible rumors before posting the most interesting of either category. He does.

Nikon Rumors does a good job at what it’s here to do, and that’s post entertaining rumors. It’s not the Nikon Gospel, and I seriously doubt any intelligent person reading here would take it as such. Sometimes they’re spot on, and with the D700 and the D3x, rumors similar to what we are seeing now were wide ranging and ridiculous, but they slowly whittled away into more or less what we got in the end, which is most likely the case with the D400.

So, relax, enjoy fantasizing about what’s next from Nikon, but do try to take the site for what it is, as opposed to what you’d like it to be. It’s not suddenly going to turn up advanced perfectly accurate knowledge of an upcoming body or lens without being a subsidiary of Nikon or getting a tester to violate some serious legal clauses in their contract.

I love my DX gear for adventure photography, especially considering how much light-weight ass the 12-24 kicks compared to the monstrous 14-24. But for my WORK, (not landscape) …I need a $2000 used D700. And for REAL landscape, well, the D3X sensor just about owned every other sensor on the market, 35mm AND medium format. So I hate to say it but new DX bodies are of less interest to me, for the first time ever…

=Matt=

1. Would you accept this excuse from a newspaper that routinely reports false statements without checking them? Of course not, it’s their job to do that research, otherwise I’m better off without reading that paper altogether.

2. As admin, you should be interested in keeping your site interesting. If there is a way to make it more interesting with minimal effort from your side, can there be any reason not to do it?

The point of a rumor site is not spreading the rumors themselves, but collecting knowledge about them, so readers can judge their credibility. This is where people go to to find information about rumors they heard on some forum somewhere. Recognizing fakes that are as easy to bust as the one above should not user generated content.

You may think you’re generating traffic that way, but in the long run, you aren’t. You are just creating doubt in your competence on the topic and commitment to the site.

– snorri

D3 Front Nikon Press USA below
http://press.nikonusa.com/gallery/nikon/Digital_SLR/D3/images/D3_24-70_front.jpg

D3X Back Nikon USA below
http://i37.tinypic.com/1f924g.jpg

D3 Back Nikon Press USA below
http://press.nikonusa.com/gallery/nikon/Digital_SLR/D3/images/D3_back.jpg”

So the D3x photos WERE photoshopped. The surprising thing was that Nikon used photoshopped photos as official photos.
So with the D400 we definitely have a photoshopped photo, too, but from the experience with the D3x I refrain to say it is fake in the sense of some hobbyist fake and that the real thing will look different. But photoshopped it is, too. Without any doubt.