New “talked to Olympus rep” rumor :)


Mr. “Omega” sent me a new “talked to an Olympus rep” rumor :)
As I told you in the past those kind of rumors are very dangerous and unreliable. But it’s amazing to see how much Olympus reps talk :) Here is what the Omega shared to us: “A visit to Focus on Imaging over the weekend provided me with a little piece of tittle tattle which might be of interest. I spoke with ‘Mr Olympus UK’. His comment was “don’t buy the E-M5, wait until autumn, then you can have a body which will use your 4/3 lenses (50 macro, 11-22 & 50-200, with tube and 2x convertor), there was no suggestion of a 4/3 mount body.

As usual take those kind of info with a grain of salt. We learned it from the past that Olympus reps not always share the full truth!

  • I want to believe this rumor.

    • digifan

      Wishfull thinking.
      It can’t ever be true. No good salesperson would hold people off of buying their products. It’s totally irrational.
      And a supposedly big shot saying this, should be fired immediately.
      There’s no future in 43 even if an E-7 would arrive. Olympus sales people should convince all customers to buy m43 especially professionals. They’d offer special deals to trade in certain gear. If E-7 appears it’s still a temporary solution until E-Mx can make use of 43 lenses. Ultimately it’s the m43 line that is the future.

      • The so is good business for OLympus is sell so many M43 lens by good IQ so them can produce, and support 43 by new camera.

  • MarcoSartoriPhoto

    That’s a big thing to say. Following this thought, Olympus should retire OMD-Em5 from the market..

    • pitrak

      He was talking to someone with 4/3 lenses. If you don’t have those, the OM-D is fine I guess. Except if you really need particular 4/3 lenses.

    • Not so big to say, this is only a E-M7 coming soon. ;-)

  • KI

    yay! (fingers crossed).

  • Ghost

    What about those who already have E-M5? Will we get some adapter for PDAF to CDAF? Or rumor sugests that new OM-D will have PDAF & CDAF sensor? (So use of FT lenses will still be through MMF-1/2/3 adapter?)

    • Matthias

      If I could not use 43 lenses with my E-M5 and had to buy a new body to use better lenses then the existing ones I would be very angry… Don’t want to buy a new body almost every year…

      • Duarte Bruno

        Do you remember the vintage commercials?
        “It’s a Sony!”

        • Duarte Bruno

          This reply was meant to be to “Ghost”.
          Sony has made sensors with PD-AF.

  • Anonymous

    For those who are interested, the man in question was way above rep status. Though as Admin states one can only consider these snippets as rumour, though past experience with this guy has proven genuine.

    • Thanks for the info.

      Anyway, the reps are part of the sales and often channel wishful thinking. A lot can change in the half year.

    • Dave Bennett

      I know who he is and I would be very surprised if he actually said that. Even so, what he may have been talking about is what many of us have been led to expect later in the year.

  • Narretz

    My cat told me that the EP-5 has a built in EVF. True story.
    And some days ago, I dreamed of the Panasonic GF-7. It was very slim, and had a new 12 mm pancake, also very slim, but bigger in diameter than the 14 mm.

    • Bob B.


    • gl

      12mm oancake eh? Did your cat dream the speed too? : )

    • bousozoku

      Maybe an eyepiece (EP-5) will have a viewfinder but will the E-P5 camera body?

  • Anonymous

    Will on sensor PDAF work with IBIS?

    • Now that is a profound question!
      PDAF on sensor will work w/ nano-scale margins for accuracy, so a 5-axis IBIS throwing the sensor around will surely have an adverse effect here. Maybe the IBIS could freeze the sensor shift whilst PDAF is going on, but that again would ruin image stabilization in EVF/LiveView, let alone almost nullify IBIS efficiency during CAF. Hard to tell really, but initially PDAF on sensor and IBIS does not seem to be the best combination ever..?

      • Mr. Reeee

        That makes sense.

        It may be a matter of selecting and using one or the other, but not both together. Maybe that’s why Nikon and Canon chose lens stabilization over some form of IBIS. That and the fact that lens stabilization can be optimized for the specific lens it’s used in.

        • No, Canon and Nikon use in-lens stabilization because their solution dates back to the days of film when there was no sensor to move (and moving film quickly isn’t an option really). It has totally zero to do with it being better, and everything with it being the only possible solution at the time, and neither of them wanting to change their ways (if only because they can ask a premium for VR/OIS/whatever stabilized lenses).

          In-lens stabilization can be fine-tuned to a lens, and may get a little advantage from that, through the only relevant metric here is magnification, because that magnification dictates how much compensation is needed. This can easily be inferred from focal length, so there isn’t much to ‘fine-tune’ here really. The only real advantage of in-lens stabilization is where it sits in the optical path, resulting in needing smaller movements for the same amount of compensation. This may make it somewhat easier to implement for high levels of magnification (long lenses).

          Image stabilization tries to compensate for ‘camera shake’, regardless of this being done ‘in-lens’ or ‘in-body’, the effect being that what was initially in the center of the image will stay in the center of the image. Regardless of which of the 2 solutions is used, this HELPS any form of AF, as long as the focus points are relatively close to the center. Why? Because it ensures the AF point/area keeps seeing the exact same bit of detail to focus on.

          In other words, it doesn’t matter if you move lens elements or the sensor, as long as it ensures that the point you started focusing on will be projected at the exact same spot of the sensor (there where the PDAF pixels are or where your CDAF focus area is)

          • But anyway IS axis up/down and left/right can not be useing by AF point so is out for center.

            • When using on-sensor PDAF, the PDAF points move with the sensor because they are on that sensor, so when IS manages to keep image details covering the same pixels on a sensor, it can also keep the PDAF pixels covered by the same detail. For IS there is absolutely zero difference between image pixels and AF pixels. Either it works for both or it doesn’t work.

              And yes, again, this assumes ON SENSOR PDAF, and NOT the classic separate AF sensors like a DSLR has, the DSLR case is radically different, and conclusions drawn from the DSLR implementation are totally wrong for a mirrorless camera which uses the imaging sensor for AF).

              Which movements IS can do, and the effect on off-center detail totally depends on the IS implementation (generally the difference betwee 2 axis vs 5 axis, it does NOT matter if it is done by a lens element or the sensor itself).

              • “When using on-sensor PDAF, the PDAF points move with the sensor because they are on that sensor…”

                Yes, and IMO therein lies the problem.
                Because the phases thrown from the lens to the PDAF-enabled pixels will be disturbed by that very motion.

                Here’s PDAF schematics:

                If PDAF registration resides on the image sensor (as opposed to dedicated PDAF sensors away from it), the sensor (drawn yellow in the schematics) will randomly move w/ IBIS, altering the phases along with it. How to compensate for that?

                IBIS will not interfere w/ CDAF, because sensor movement does not influence any contrast thrown from the lens, but it will interfere the phases in a dual ray comparison. Right?

                • If the sensor is moving it is because the image is moving on the sensor. So the PDAF enabled sensors are maintaining a fixed relationship with the object being photographed. The effect is as if the lens is the part moving. This would be seen by a PDAF sensor in the same way as a working lens OIS.

                  How about modifying the stabiliser circuitry to act as a focus tool. The stabilizer could move forward or backward a small distance to initiate the start of AF faster than a lens can be moved.

                  • You mean a 6-axis IS, so the last part of focus so camera do is by CDAF, and i think pixler out to side of sensor will also coming in focus to.

                    • Actually I was thinking that a rapid movement of the sensor forwards or backwards would precede the AF this starting it in the correct direction and speeding up the process for PDAF on sensor.
                      I would call it a 3d sensor but 6 way would do.
                      It could also be used for ultra fine AF adjustments, faster than lens motors.
                      Then that leads onto sensors being movable and adjustable forwards and backwards to enable different formats in the same camera with ultra thin adapters or focal reducers built in.

                • its no different to image movement in normal pdAF Erik. Remember at the heart of pdAF for SLRs is just a sensor with pixels exclusively for AF. The difference with pdAF on sensor is those pixels normally tasked with imaging are lost to focusing.

                  Incorporate IS and the sensor simply follows the image which means the image is detectable in the same place for longer, you cant make a pdAF SLR to do the same, so an SLR is inherently the weaker

      • I dont think so, it would mean you also cant use on sensor pdaf while riding a rodeo competition?

        • Not the same thing.
          A moving camera in your hand and an internally shifting sensor at MHz speeds are not comparable. I dunno how a PDAF-on-sensor device is constructed, but it seems likely that any IBIS sensor shift must influence the extremely fine-tuned measurements for phase detection. It seems only logical that performing PDAF at pixel level on a high-res sensor would require those pixels to stay in the same position *relative* to any PDAF-reading device during PD, which any IBIS will interfere with. An overall movement of the cam itself will not affect this, but a shift in the pixel positioning relative to the “rest of” the PDAF assembly will – if such an assembly consists of any parts outside the shifting sensor itself that is. If all physical things required for PDAF-on-sensor resides exclusively on the sensor itself, and thus will move along w/ the IBIS, it should not be a problem. But should the PD be read by something outside the sensor, I’d wager it will be problematic…

          • Absolute agree by you Erik.

          • You are probably right. IIRC, Mr. Terada from Olympus was quite reserved when asked about on-chip PDAF and said it was one possibility out of several to address the lens compatibility issue. IBIS may well be the reason for that. Later on an adapter with image stabilization capability was mentioned, which further supports your theory.

            It sounds like Olympus has been facing an immense challenge, which raises the question where Panasonic is standing in relation to 4/3 lenses. It has no liabilities in this regard, but being the first to develop a compatible body would surely have its merits.

            • digifan

              I don’t think so. How is it possible to focus with the sensor without PD-AF on sensor. aren’t the pixels used for CD-AF and isn’t the contrast shifting as much as PD-AF would detect distance.
              So IMO Eric’s explanation is BS.
              Olympus doesn’t put PD-AF pixels on sensor because the real estate they would take up.
              It would mean less resolution.

            • Terada is ‘reserved’ because various systems are patented. Likewise Olympus has its own patent but its possible it infringes someone elses patent in part. Its common sense not to put yourself in a condemning situation until that is sorted.

              • And for those of us who were around in the mid 80s, Olympus has run into this issue in a rather big way with their first and only AF capable OM body (OM 77 or 707 depending on where you live). In some ways Olympus still dealing with the effects of that debacle.

          • I just wonder if the sensor really moves at mhz speed. I mean, it works mostly at the lower shutterspeeds, so its movement speed should be similar?

            • The speed at which the sensor moves is directly related to the vibration measured by the motion detectors. It doesn’t just randomly vibrate at mhz frequencies, if it did it couldn’t work at all.

              Keep in mind that IS (any form and shape) tries to keep the same pixels covered by the same bit of image detail. This is why it allows longer shutter speeds without visible blur from camera shake.

            • And i always thought that the pdaf is on the sensor also, so it movements are similar like any of the pixels while there is movement. It seems you are talking about pdaf not being on the sensor itself?

              • Traditional DSLRs use separate focusing sensors, and so the PDAF pixels aren’t on the imaging sensor indeed.

          • Erik, that fine-tuning for PDAF has everything to do with the AF sensors and the imaging sensor not being the same thing in a (D)SLR. Those 2 need to be calibrated to the exact same optical distance or you’ll get front/back focus.

            This issue simply does not exist at all when using the imaging sensor for AF.

            Additionally, the sensor movement aims to keep the center of the sensor covered by the center of the image, in other words, it will let the PDAF pixels on an imaging sensor (or the CDAF focus area) focus on the same bit of detail. That helps any form of AF done by the imaging sensor, including PDAF.

            Its not like the sensor is just wildly vibrating without any reason, if that were the case, it would harm any picture you’d try to take, and this would get worse with longer exposures. That isn’t what IS does now is it?

            • Maybe Erik is a dslr user? ;-)

            • “Erik, that fine-tuning for PDAF has everything to do with the AF sensors and the imaging sensor not being the same thing in a (D)SLR. Those 2 need to be calibrated to the exact same optical distance or you’ll get front/back focus. This issue simply does not exist at all when using the imaging sensor for AF.”

              In trad. PDAF light is diverted onto a separate PDAF sensor array (away from the image sensor), analyzing two different sets of incoming light rays (from either side of the lens). These PDAF sensors are positioned in a permanent stand-still position relative to the lens and the image sensor (and also in the exact same focal distance from the lens as the image sensor). But w/ PDAF-on-sensor combined w/ IBIS, any phase difference from the two sets of rays will be altered by the sensor shift, because the PDAF-enabled pixels will move relative to the lens. These pixels may well register phase differences, but how to calculate/compensate for IBIS, which erratically will move the sensor to counteract any unpredictable camera shake?

              “Additionally, the sensor movement aims to keep the center of the sensor covered by the center of the image, in other words, it will let the PDAF pixels on an imaging sensor (or the CDAF focus area) focus on the same bit of detail. That helps any form of AF done by the imaging sensor, including PDAF.”

              Sounds plausible.
              As long as it can discern the sensor shift from the phase shift. It must register the phases, coming from the lens, which no longer will be in a fixed position, relative to the image sensor that holds the PDAF-enabled pixels. But then again, what do I know. Frankly I have no idea of how PDAF-on-sensor is designed. It just seems illogical to me that phases from the lens can reliably be measured from 5-axis/3D moving sensor…

              “Its not like the sensor is just wildly vibrating without any reason, if that were the case, it would harm any picture you’d try to take, and this would get worse with longer exposures. That isn’t what IS does now is it?”

              Of course not. Who said that?
              When I mention MHz movements, I mean responsiveness, not duration or continuity. The IBIS will will *respond* to movements within a MHz time resolution, counteracting any movement suitably for amplitude and speed. The movement itself may be slow, in accordance to such a camera movement, but the response-time before the IBIS goes into action is close to immediate.

              • digifan

                “These pixels may well register phase differences, but how to calculate/compensate for IBIS, which erratically will move the sensor to counteract any unpredictable camera shake?”
                Here you go wrong the IS sensors detect the movement and adjust accordingly.
                It’s calculated, that’s why CD-AF and IBIS is so reliable, and why there were problems with certain lenses due to lens construction.
                The Olympus 14-42mm and the Panasonic Vario X 14-42mm had lens wobble that caused for additional shake. The sensors are in camera and will compensate for camera shake only, they cannot compensate for the additional lens shake. That’s the reason why these two lenses delivered bad result in some circumstances.

              • Erik,

                Lens based IS will cause the exact same potential issue, as it shifts the projected image by moving lens element(s), hence changing the optical path. Shifting the image with help of the lens will cause a change to the length of the optical path for the 2 light rays, and this change will not be identical for both, hence it causes a different phase shift for those rays.

                Camera shake will also cause such issues, at least when it includes rotation around the height or lenght axis, as this slightly rotates the image plane and the lens, again changing the length of the paths of the 2 light rays in slightly different ways, and again causing a different phase shift for both rays.

                Additionally, the ‘picking 2 rays of light’ works completely different for sensor based IS because there is no ‘obstruction’ (aka mirror) in a convenient place for doing this.

          • NEWS FLASH.
            Mr Olympus UK is to be known as Mr Nikon UK. Having just joined Nikon from Olympus in a secret deal set up just prior to Focus on Imaging

          • youve got it backwards Erik, pixels dont shift, they follow the image, thats the whole idea of it

      • Duarte Bruno

        Or then again maybe PD-AF is so fast that you couldn’t care less about what stabilization does.
        How are other PD-AF solutions doing?

      • MdB

        Sony uses it both on the A99, don’t see it being too much of a problem.

      • MdB

        Also if this were an issue, it would be an issue for Canon and Nikon with their fixed PDAF sensor and moving lens elements (and thus image).

        • Sony doesnt use on sensor PDAF for the A99, that is what the SLT mirror is for. However they do use it on their new nex which doesnt have on sensor IBIS. As for Canon’s on sensor PDAF, apparently it isnt very good.

          ALl in all he raises a very good point, how successful could on-sensor pdaf be with a moving pdaf sensor? I still think a new DSLR is coming, no way olympus with perfect what noone else has managed to do while not producing sensors themselves.

        • exactly

      • LOL, maybe “Mr.Olympus UK” is from Panasonic. :-D

        • zozio32

          I don’t understand: the IBIS is suppose to compensate the vibration of the user, hand holding his camera. At best, the moving sensor reduces the relative motion of the “image” on the sensor. What wrong could it do to the PDAF on sensor, or CDAF for that matter?

          • i thought the same, if both are on the sensor, it should not be a problem (are we engineers or photographers? lol)

          • exactly

      • IS steadies the sensor assuring a better AF lock for phased cdAF derived systems (pdAF)

    • Jekyll&Hyde

      IBIS will optimize PDAF!! Think of a sony or nikon without any antishake reduction. The PDAF has to follow fuzzy movements as sum of object- plus handmovement. Using an IBIS the sensor is relatively stabilized to the outer real world. That improves PDAF.

    • Jekyll&Hyde

      IBIS will stabilize PDAF as well. Without stabilization you have the movement of the object plus fotografers that will result in fuzzy follow focus movements

  • poala

    A Olympu reüresentative who says don´t buy our product now…lol

  • Yun

    If time is the point , why not give Oly more time to produce that kind of breakthrough gadget .
    Only less than 9 months to go to know if the wait is worth . I don’t think it’s realistic or wise move to get a EM5 in the year of 2013 .

    • zozio32

      I am eagirly waiting for the new OMD to come out just to get the current at lower price! ;-)

      so plese Mr Olympus, start shipping new high end cams as soon as possible

    • Bob B.

      The OMD is a wonderful camera…and it is here ( discounted at some retailers)…NOW.
      NOW is a concept often overlooked on rumor sites! ~:-o

      • admin

        +1 :)

      • Ross

        And I’m enjoying mine NOW too! ;)

      • Ulli

        absolutely true, rumorians live with their mind in the future

        • Bob B.

          So…they miss living….:-(

    • michael

      It’s a wise move for me, because I sold off my 4/3 lenses when my E-520 died.

      If Olympus had been more forthcoming with their roadmap (rather than leading the world to believe the 4/3 was dead) I might still be an Oly fanboy. Instead I wouldn’t hesitate to switch to Panasonic (or anyone else) who make a body that suits my needs and my lenses.

      • MAFAv8r

        A point of correction Michael. Olympus never gave the impression 43 was dead. It was people on the Internet who said that. I have sold my E5 but have kept the lenses.

  • MarcoSartoriPhoto

    Admin, why does it take so long to moderate my comments? On SonyAlphaRumors, MirrorlessRumors and FujiRumors they appear instantly..

    • admin

      As this is a plugin doing the job I honestly can say…I don’t know. But I am going to change this comment system anyway…

    • Ulli

      Marco if you dont use your email it will not moderate, i do it like that now. Because i was in moderated status for half a day sometimes, so got tired of it and always reply without sigin in now

      • strangely enough no moderation right now

        • MarcoSartoriPhoto

          Let me try

        • MarcoSartoriPhoto

          Wow! Thanks Ulli! I have always thought that putting an email adress was mandatory! Now it works fast.

          • lol yes..its strange that users who input email are moderated, while the anonymous ones are not…….but when i sign in here, the moderation is gone.

  • brizac

    and what about the top pro lenses as the 300/2.8 which I would like/need to use most? I have not sold it yet – still hoping for an acceptable solution. In the meanwhile I am using Nikon and the 600/4, but would be happy to return to Olympus.

    • brod1er

      I am still holding out for a high quality 20x tele converter for the mZD 17mm f2.8. Why do Olympus never listen:-(

  • I was told similar about 3 months ago :)

  • Ross

    It might be wishful thinking that the next OM-D model will do PD-AF or maybe it will. Either way, I’m not sorry I bought the E-M5 last year. However, in due course I guess we’ll find out. It’s just the waiting that might be hard. ;)

    • Ulli

      when i look the sessions i did with my current lens setup and omd, i wonder, what do i need more, beside artistic ideas/concepts?

      • Exactly. But then, it has always been true and we are still here. Sad.

        • Ulli

          lol yes

        • Ross

          It’s the “I want more” or “someone might have something better than me” or “I gotta have the latest” that’s probably the real truth as to why we are here. ;)

      • Matthias

        Better Oly zoome lenses? ;-)

  • Marck

    It’s seems more to be a Sony or Nikon rep, not an Olympus one! ahahah, nobody would ever tell you “do not buy now, wait for the new products…” unless he’s got interest to sell other competitor brand product.

    • No kidding — hard to believe anybody from Oly (especially a high-ranking somebody) would actually say “don’t buy xyz from us.” Just google “Osborne effect” for the history of this kind of chatter.

  • Luda

    We can only hope they decide to give a green light to much improved video codec and 25/50, 30/60 framerate models.
    For some reason they don’t want to unleash the full capacity of 5-axis system which is great for video use. In order to do that they need to equip that new camera much better video capabilities.

  • Jalo

    I do not think this Oly rep is true, no sales person would say “do not buy our existing product now but wait half a year”

    • Well, one of the only exceptions I can think of is a case where an Olympus sales manager privately advises an owner of multiple 4/3 lenses circa 2013. Gentlemen do this sometimes.

      • Ross

        That would be the true salesman. Don’t just sell to the customer today but satisfy the customer’s needs for tomorrow too.

      • Jalo

        A dealer might say that to selected customers, but not to all… unless Olympus rep buys back all unsold cameras from dealer ;)

    • digifan

      I don’t think it’s plausible either.
      A good salesmen would perhaps tell this, but would certainly try to sell the OM-D maybe by offering a special deal, as a service. If he can use the 43 lenses in future is a bonus to also make him aware of the quality of m43. There’s absolutely no future in 43 so I can’t imaging the salesman not trying to persuade 43 lens owner to go with m43 gear, if a solution is around the corner.
      What’s particularly interresting is that he doesn’t say a word if it’s 43 or m43, this makes it totally unbelievable to me. The guy in question would know those details if he knew the new product.

  • Does anyone know if the 4/3 11-22mm zoom linked above has mechanical manual focus?

    (as opposed to fly-by-wire manual focus of all m43 lenses)

    • It’s focus-by-wire, but a very nice lens. My favorite zoom of all times.

  • Gardener

    This is not the reception I got on Monday the Olympus staff were very helpful, they even had a member of staff on the Camera World stand for any final advice before purchasing. I bought the black body with the 45mm promotional option.

  • Andy

    I spoke to another Olympus guy at Focus – told me they had been sent an email from Olympus HQ saying the E-7 was definitely coming before the end of the year (in shops by the end) and an E-M7 in the same timescale.

    • Ross

      I think that sounds fairly consistant with various bits of information coming from various sources (including hints from Olympus management last year).

  • Sunny

    Thank you for the information. Then, I´m going to sell my M5 short before autumn. And maybe buy a NEX6. ;-)

  • chronocommando

    LoL if any of this is true there might be a reason why he is talking about non SWD lenses only?!

  • john

    I get a good laugh on this site . I think most are Nikon and Canon owners here to bash 4/3rds . Olympus has scared so many people out of buying their cameras they would be better off making them for someone else to sell

    • Ross

      I get a laugh out of the ‘hand wringers’ & the ‘dummy spitters’ too. :D

  • I used to be a Sony rep and regularly spoke to a Canon, Samsung and Olympus rep. We are all told nothing about future products so it’s purely a speculation from someone into cameras. Nothing more. The rep status adds nothing to this. Do you really think the camera designers in Japan are passing rumours to reps around the world?

    Oh, and if he’s telling people to not buy the OMD, then he is particularly bad too as he’s basically telling people not to give money to the company that is paying him! Autumn is a long way away still. Even if that is when the new camera is readily available then, you still are with your old camera for spring and summer which (for me at least) is when I go out and take the most photos and enjoy photography the most.

  • ISO 1638400

    Should be “humor”. Or “stupor”. Not “rumor”. That would make more sense.

  • CharleyW

    I’m surprised everyone here doesn’t think sales people shouldn’t be praised for this. Sure Mr Olympus has missed out on a discounted sale of 1 OM-D at Focus… but in the long term (if rumours turn out to be true) has continued to keep the trust between a loyal customer that will continue to buy in the future.

    Selling it just because the opportunity arose is a very narrow minded approach to sales, Especially when it is a high ticket value product with attachment and upgrade potential in the future. We all know hell hath no fury like an Olympus user scorned, so good on you Mr Olympus, I just wish the guy at the apple store could have advised me of the 4th Gen iPad before I bought the 3. Live and learn!

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website,, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.