Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Exacting Precision From Near or Afar: Nikon's Newest NIKKOR Lenses

Reply
Thread Tools

Exacting Precision From Near or Afar: Nikon's Newest NIKKOR Lenses

 
 
Trevor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013

"PeterN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:510d5604$0$10792$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com...
> On 2/1/2013 10:24 PM, Trevor wrote:
>> "PeterN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:510c65aa$0$10826$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com...
>>> My younger daughter used to take care of an Akita for one of her
>>> neighbors, when they were out. One day she took the dog to an outdoor
>>> coffee shop, where she sat down with the Akita. Some guy made got closer
>>> than the dog thought safe. The dog went to full alert and stared at an
>>> imaginary point on the ground.. fortunately, this guy had the good sense
>>> not to cross that line.

>>
>> Sad that non dog people cannot even go for a coffee without the risk of
>> being mauled though
>>
>>
>>

> there was no risk if they didn't cross that line.



That's the point, they should be at no risk ina public place even IF they
are unaware of that imaginary line, as many children are.

Trevor.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013
On Feb 1, 8:04*pm, PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 2/1/2013 7:17 PM, Elliott Roper wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <510be63d$0$10794$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>, PeterN
> > <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> >> <snip>
> >> You might consider a very high resolution camera. Here is an example of
> >> a shot from over 100 yds away, with my 70-200mm using a 1.7 extender.
> >> i.e. effective 340mm, hand held. I could pro bably crop mire without the
> >> image breaking up.

>
> >> The first image is full frame.
> >> The last is a crop.
> >> <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/97242118/_DSC6570.jpg>

>
> > I can see why you need to stand back with a tele lens for that critter.
> > He has not finished eating the last guy's lens

>
> Nah! Iguanas are harmless, but they like to eat eggs.
>
> --
> PeterN


Too many stupid Americans buy things like that as pets then get bored
with them, set them free so they become harmful invasive species.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Trevor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013

"nick c" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:kejujg$gdv$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> My younger daughter used to take care of an Akita for one of her
>>>>> neighbors, when they were out. One day she took the dog to an outdoor
>>>>> coffee shop, where she sat down with the Akita. Some guy made got
>>>>> closer
>>>>> than the dog thought safe. The dog went to full alert and stared at an
>>>>> imaginary point on the ground.. fortunately, this guy had the good
>>>>> sense
>>>>> not to cross that line.
>>>>
>>>> Sad that non dog people cannot even go for a coffee without the risk of
>>>> being mauled though
>>>>
>>>
>>> "Mauled" is it now, with not even a warning growl? Ones imagination
>>> oftimes surfaces without bothering to think about what one is imagining.
>>> It has been said, a dog may instinctively be a judge of someones
>>> character, therefore, no dog should be approached without exercising
>>> caution. There is a reason why a dog is said to be "man's best friend."
>>> Perhaps a non dog person may not have experienced having such a best
>>> friend.

>>
>>
>> Knowing how many children have been killed in dog attacks here, and many
>> adults who have been seriously injured, I am not as prepared to forgive
>> all
>> dogs and their inconsiderate owners. Perhaps you are one of the latter so
>> don't get that not everyone is as enamoured by your dog as you are?
>>

>
>
> At the present time I don't have a dog to be enamored with but I've had
> dogs (and other animals) that are more friendly and better company than
> many people. Neither were they as idiotic nor neurotic as many people can
> be. Indeed, there are dogs that are as unpredictable as people and there
> are dogs that have been used to save lives. In fact, many civil and
> federal agencies have come to rely upon dogs to do various helpful tasks
> that are not practical or possible for humans to do. To fault an entire
> specie of animals for the faults of a few without knowing a case history
> is about as ridiculous as one can be.


Nobody was doing that, so you are the one who is "as ridiculous as one can
be".


>However, in your case, your rant against dogs in general may be
>understandable as you may be qualified and entitled to be known as one who
>is neurotic.


I rightly thought the specific example given was VERY poor on the part of
the dog handler.
You are the one "ranting".

Trevor.


 
Reply With Quote
 
nick c
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013
On 2/2/2013 12:03 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
> PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On 2/1/2013 10:24 PM, Trevor wrote:
>>> "PeterN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:510c65aa$0$10826$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com...
>>>> My younger daughter used to take care of an Akita for one of her
>>>> neighbors, when they were out. One day she took the dog to an outdoor
>>>> coffee shop, where she sat down with the Akita. Some guy made got closer
>>>> than the dog thought safe. The dog went to full alert and stared at an
>>>> imaginary point on the ground.. fortunately, this guy had the good sense
>>>> not to cross that line.
>>>
>>> Sad that non dog people cannot even go for a coffee without the risk of
>>> being mauled though
>>>
>>> Trevor.
>>>
>>>

>> there was no risk if they didn't cross that line.

>
> Rather clearly in the description above there was risk.
> Given the number of people treated for dog bites, and
> the number of children killed by dogs, it is a serious
> risk too.


There is no worse an animal (which is a particular kind of person) than
a human being. I know of no animal that historically has done more
damage to other humans or environments than the human being. Clearly,
there is a risk association with humans, given the history of human
behavior. Would you suggest, in the interest of good behavior, one
should avoid contact with humans?

>
> To be more blunt, the dog was the one that crossed the
> line, not "the guy".


Irrational.

>
> I have in times past owned as many as 50 dogs. I see
> dog ownership as a very serious responsibility, and there
> is no room for a dog in public being off leash or allowed
> to make a determination of "where the line is" absent a
> command from the owner.
>


I don't recall Peter saying his the dog was off a leash. However, since
all living creatures seem to sense "where a drawn line of responsibly
may be drawn" it would behoove those who profess to be more intelligent
than a dog to avoid an animals sense of boundary.



 
Reply With Quote
 
nick c
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013
On 2/2/2013 1:09 PM, Trevor wrote:
> "nick c" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:kejujg$gdv$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>> My younger daughter used to take care of an Akita for one of her
>>>>>> neighbors, when they were out. One day she took the dog to an outdoor
>>>>>> coffee shop, where she sat down with the Akita. Some guy made got
>>>>>> closer
>>>>>> than the dog thought safe. The dog went to full alert and stared at an
>>>>>> imaginary point on the ground.. fortunately, this guy had the good
>>>>>> sense
>>>>>> not to cross that line.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sad that non dog people cannot even go for a coffee without the risk of
>>>>> being mauled though
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Mauled" is it now, with not even a warning growl? Ones imagination
>>>> oftimes surfaces without bothering to think about what one is imagining.
>>>> It has been said, a dog may instinctively be a judge of someones
>>>> character, therefore, no dog should be approached without exercising
>>>> caution. There is a reason why a dog is said to be "man's best friend."
>>>> Perhaps a non dog person may not have experienced having such a best
>>>> friend.
>>>
>>>
>>> Knowing how many children have been killed in dog attacks here, and many
>>> adults who have been seriously injured, I am not as prepared to forgive
>>> all
>>> dogs and their inconsiderate owners. Perhaps you are one of the latter so
>>> don't get that not everyone is as enamoured by your dog as you are?
>>>

>>
>>
>> At the present time I don't have a dog to be enamored with but I've had
>> dogs (and other animals) that are more friendly and better company than
>> many people. Neither were they as idiotic nor neurotic as many people can
>> be. Indeed, there are dogs that are as unpredictable as people and there
>> are dogs that have been used to save lives. In fact, many civil and
>> federal agencies have come to rely upon dogs to do various helpful tasks
>> that are not practical or possible for humans to do. To fault an entire
>> specie of animals for the faults of a few without knowing a case history
>> is about as ridiculous as one can be.

>
> Nobody was doing that, so you are the one who is "as ridiculous as one can
> be".


Yes you were ridiculous. You would condemn an entire specie of animals
based upon your slanted prejudice.

>
>
>> However, in your case, your rant against dogs in general may be
>> understandable as you may be qualified and entitled to be known as one who
>> is neurotic.

>
> I rightly thought the specific example given was VERY poor on the part of
> the dog handler.


What you "rightly thought" was an assumption on your part. You didn't
even inquire if Peter's daughter had the dog on a leash and was it close
to her. You just jumped to an unfounded conclusion. I sure as hell
wouldn't want you on any trial by jury panel.

> You are the one "ranting".


Wrong again.

>
> Trevor.
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
Trevor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013

"nick c" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:kek01h$rpp$(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 2/2/2013 12:03 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
>> PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> On 2/1/2013 10:24 PM, Trevor wrote:
>>>> "PeterN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>> news:510c65aa$0$10826$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com...
>>>>> My younger daughter used to take care of an Akita for one of her
>>>>> neighbors, when they were out. One day she took the dog to an outdoor
>>>>> coffee shop, where she sat down with the Akita. Some guy made got
>>>>> closer
>>>>> than the dog thought safe. The dog went to full alert and stared at an
>>>>> imaginary point on the ground.. fortunately, this guy had the good
>>>>> sense
>>>>> not to cross that line.
>>>>
>>>> Sad that non dog people cannot even go for a coffee without the risk of
>>>> being mauled though
>>>>
>>>>
>>> there was no risk if they didn't cross that line.

>>
>> Rather clearly in the description above there was risk.
>> Given the number of people treated for dog bites, and
>> the number of children killed by dogs, it is a serious
>> risk too.

>
> There is no worse an animal (which is a particular kind of person) than a
> human being. I know of no animal that historically has done more damage to
> other humans or environments than the human being.


No argument there.


>Clearly, there is a risk association with humans, given the history of
>human behavior. Would you suggest, in the interest of good behavior, one
>should avoid contact with humans?


Yes, if only we could avoid contact with all those crazy gun owners!!!!


>> To be more blunt, the dog was the one that crossed the
>> line, not "the guy".

>
> Irrational.


Yes, any dog which thinks there is "a line" in a public space does not have
a rational owner. Now IF the owner was actually being attacked, that might
be a different matter.


>> I have in times past owned as many as 50 dogs. I see
>> dog ownership as a very serious responsibility, and there
>> is no room for a dog in public being off leash or allowed
>> to make a determination of "where the line is" absent a
>> command from the owner.
>>

>
> I don't recall Peter saying his the dog was off a leash. However, since
> all living creatures seem to sense "where a drawn line of responsibly may
> be drawn" it would behoove those who profess to be more intelligent than a
> dog to avoid an animals sense of boundary.


It would "behoove" those who own dogs to not assume all people understand
dog behaviour any more than they understand human rights and
responsibilties.

Trevor.


 
Reply With Quote
 
nick c
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013
On 2/2/2013 1:03 PM, RichA wrote:
> On Feb 1, 8:04 pm, PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On 2/1/2013 7:17 PM, Elliott Roper wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In article <510be63d$0$10794$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com>, PeterN
>>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>> You might consider a very high resolution camera. Here is an example of
>>>> a shot from over 100 yds away, with my 70-200mm using a 1.7 extender.
>>>> i.e. effective 340mm, hand held. I could pro bably crop mire without the
>>>> image breaking up.

>>
>>>> The first image is full frame.
>>>> The last is a crop.
>>>> <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/97242118/_DSC6570.jpg>

>>
>>> I can see why you need to stand back with a tele lens for that critter.
>>> He has not finished eating the last guy's lens

>>
>> Nah! Iguanas are harmless, but they like to eat eggs.
>>
>> --
>> PeterN

>
> Too many stupid Americans buy things like that as pets then get bored
> with them, set them free so they become harmful invasive species.
>


There's a lot of truth in that statement about stupid Americans.
However, since the human specie is the same world over, I oftentimes
wonder how far that degree of stupidity is encountered; could that be a
universal condition.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Trevor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013

"nick c" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:kek0s1$1lo$(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 2/2/2013 1:09 PM, Trevor wrote:
>> "nick c" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:kejujg$gdv$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>>> My younger daughter used to take care of an Akita for one of her
>>>>>>> neighbors, when they were out. One day she took the dog to an
>>>>>>> outdoor
>>>>>>> coffee shop, where she sat down with the Akita. Some guy made got
>>>>>>> closer
>>>>>>> than the dog thought safe. The dog went to full alert and stared at
>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>> imaginary point on the ground.. fortunately, this guy had the good
>>>>>>> sense
>>>>>>> not to cross that line.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sad that non dog people cannot even go for a coffee without the risk
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> being mauled though
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Mauled" is it now, with not even a warning growl? Ones imagination
>>>>> oftimes surfaces without bothering to think about what one is
>>>>> imagining.
>>>>> It has been said, a dog may instinctively be a judge of someones
>>>>> character, therefore, no dog should be approached without exercising
>>>>> caution. There is a reason why a dog is said to be "man's best
>>>>> friend."
>>>>> Perhaps a non dog person may not have experienced having such a best
>>>>> friend.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Knowing how many children have been killed in dog attacks here, and
>>>> many
>>>> adults who have been seriously injured, I am not as prepared to forgive
>>>> all
>>>> dogs and their inconsiderate owners. Perhaps you are one of the latter
>>>> so
>>>> don't get that not everyone is as enamoured by your dog as you are?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At the present time I don't have a dog to be enamored with but I've had
>>> dogs (and other animals) that are more friendly and better company than
>>> many people. Neither were they as idiotic nor neurotic as many people
>>> can
>>> be. Indeed, there are dogs that are as unpredictable as people and there
>>> are dogs that have been used to save lives. In fact, many civil and
>>> federal agencies have come to rely upon dogs to do various helpful tasks
>>> that are not practical or possible for humans to do. To fault an entire
>>> specie of animals for the faults of a few without knowing a case history
>>> is about as ridiculous as one can be.

>>
>> Nobody was doing that, so you are the one who is "as ridiculous as one
>> can
>> be".

>
> Yes you were ridiculous. You would condemn an entire specie of animals
> based upon your slanted prejudice.



Better learn how to read what is written, and comprehend it before making
such accusations.


>>> However, in your case, your rant against dogs in general may be
>>> understandable as you may be qualified and entitled to be known as one
>>> who
>>> is neurotic.

>>
>> I rightly thought the specific example given was VERY poor on the part of
>> the dog handler.

>
> What you "rightly thought" was an assumption on your part. You didn't even
> inquire if Peter's daughter had the dog on a leash and was it close to
> her. You just jumped to an unfounded conclusion. I sure as hell wouldn't
> want you on any trial by jury panel.
>
>> You are the one "ranting".

>
> Wrong again.


Of course you would say that, you just don't get it, and never will it
seems.

Trevor.


 
Reply With Quote
 
nick c
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013
On 2/2/2013 1:42 PM, Trevor wrote:
> "nick c" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:kek01h$rpp$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> On 2/2/2013 12:03 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
>>> PeterN <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>> On 2/1/2013 10:24 PM, Trevor wrote:
>>>>> "PeterN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>> news:510c65aa$0$10826$(E-Mail Removed)-secrets.com...
>>>>>> My younger daughter used to take care of an Akita for one of her
>>>>>> neighbors, when they were out. One day she took the dog to an outdoor
>>>>>> coffee shop, where she sat down with the Akita. Some guy made got
>>>>>> closer
>>>>>> than the dog thought safe. The dog went to full alert and stared at an
>>>>>> imaginary point on the ground.. fortunately, this guy had the good
>>>>>> sense
>>>>>> not to cross that line.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sad that non dog people cannot even go for a coffee without the risk of
>>>>> being mauled though
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> there was no risk if they didn't cross that line.
>>>
>>> Rather clearly in the description above there was risk.
>>> Given the number of people treated for dog bites, and
>>> the number of children killed by dogs, it is a serious
>>> risk too.

>>
>> There is no worse an animal (which is a particular kind of person) than a
>> human being. I know of no animal that historically has done more damage to
>> other humans or environments than the human being.

>
> No argument there.
>
>
>> Clearly, there is a risk association with humans, given the history of
>> human behavior. Would you suggest, in the interest of good behavior, one
>> should avoid contact with humans?

>
> Yes, if only we could avoid contact with all those crazy gun owners!!!!


Somehow I had the feeling that the subject of Guns would enter the
conversation. I see you don't like gun owners too. Oh well, in time of
trouble, don't ask a gun owner to be of any help to you. That will teach
them to own guns. [<g>]

>
>
>>> To be more blunt, the dog was the one that crossed the
>>> line, not "the guy".

>>
>> Irrational.

>
> Yes, any dog which thinks there is "a line" in a public space does not have
> a rational owner. Now IF the owner was actually being attacked, that might
> be a different matter.


Yes, that's a common thought. One should wait for an attack to happen
rather than prevent an attack from happening. I gather you're not one
who believes in preventative medicine.

>
>
>>> I have in times past owned as many as 50 dogs. I see
>>> dog ownership as a very serious responsibility, and there
>>> is no room for a dog in public being off leash or allowed
>>> to make a determination of "where the line is" absent a
>>> command from the owner.
>>>

>>
>> I don't recall Peter saying his the dog was off a leash. However, since
>> all living creatures seem to sense "where a drawn line of responsibly may
>> be drawn" it would behoove those who profess to be more intelligent than a
>> dog to avoid an animals sense of boundary.

>
> It would "behoove" those who own dogs to not assume all people understand
> dog behaviour any more than they understand human rights and
> responsibilties.


Just as it would "behoove" one not to make a quick judgment call without
knowing, nor inquiring about, prevailing conditions that are being
discussed.

>
> Trevor.
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
nick c
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-02-2013
On 2/2/2013 1:44 PM, Trevor wrote:
> "nick c" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:kek0s1$1lo$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> On 2/2/2013 1:09 PM, Trevor wrote:
>>> "nick c" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:kejujg$gdv$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>>>> My younger daughter used to take care of an Akita for one of her
>>>>>>>> neighbors, when they were out. One day she took the dog to an
>>>>>>>> outdoor
>>>>>>>> coffee shop, where she sat down with the Akita. Some guy made got
>>>>>>>> closer
>>>>>>>> than the dog thought safe. The dog went to full alert and stared at
>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>> imaginary point on the ground.. fortunately, this guy had the good
>>>>>>>> sense
>>>>>>>> not to cross that line.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sad that non dog people cannot even go for a coffee without the risk
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> being mauled though
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Mauled" is it now, with not even a warning growl? Ones imagination
>>>>>> oftimes surfaces without bothering to think about what one is
>>>>>> imagining.
>>>>>> It has been said, a dog may instinctively be a judge of someones
>>>>>> character, therefore, no dog should be approached without exercising
>>>>>> caution. There is a reason why a dog is said to be "man's best
>>>>>> friend."
>>>>>> Perhaps a non dog person may not have experienced having such a best
>>>>>> friend.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Knowing how many children have been killed in dog attacks here, and
>>>>> many
>>>>> adults who have been seriously injured, I am not as prepared to forgive
>>>>> all
>>>>> dogs and their inconsiderate owners. Perhaps you are one of the latter
>>>>> so
>>>>> don't get that not everyone is as enamoured by your dog as you are?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At the present time I don't have a dog to be enamored with but I've had
>>>> dogs (and other animals) that are more friendly and better company than
>>>> many people. Neither were they as idiotic nor neurotic as many people
>>>> can
>>>> be. Indeed, there are dogs that are as unpredictable as people and there
>>>> are dogs that have been used to save lives. In fact, many civil and
>>>> federal agencies have come to rely upon dogs to do various helpful tasks
>>>> that are not practical or possible for humans to do. To fault an entire
>>>> specie of animals for the faults of a few without knowing a case history
>>>> is about as ridiculous as one can be.
>>>
>>> Nobody was doing that, so you are the one who is "as ridiculous as one
>>> can
>>> be".

>>
>> Yes you were ridiculous. You would condemn an entire specie of animals
>> based upon your slanted prejudice.

>
>
> Better learn how to read what is written, and comprehend it before making
> such accusations.


You said "Knowing how many children have been killed in dog attacks
here, and
many adults who have been seriously injured, I am not as prepared to
forgive all
dogs and their inconsiderate owners. Perhaps you are one of the latter
so don't get that not everyone is as enamoured by your dog as you are?"

Apparently you're not aware of what you write. As I said, I have no dog
to be enamored with and since you're not "as prepared to forgive all
dogs and their inconsiderate owners" you obviously do harbor a great
deal of prejudice against dogs in general.

>
>
>>>> However, in your case, your rant against dogs in general may be
>>>> understandable as you may be qualified and entitled to be known as one
>>>> who
>>>> is neurotic.
>>>
>>> I rightly thought the specific example given was VERY poor on the part of
>>> the dog handler.

>>
>> What you "rightly thought" was an assumption on your part. You didn't even
>> inquire if Peter's daughter had the dog on a leash and was it close to
>> her. You just jumped to an unfounded conclusion. I sure as hell wouldn't
>> want you on any trial by jury panel.
>>
>>> You are the one "ranting".

>>
>> Wrong again.

>
> Of course you would say that, you just don't get it, and never will it
> seems.


Wasn't I who thought to conversationally chastise Peter's daughter for
her "VERY poor part of the dog handler."


>
> Trevor.
>
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Efficiency of cheap macro lenses at near infrared? mianileng Digital Photography 18 11-22-2011 09:52 PM
Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?= Digital Photography 3 06-25-2006 01:43 PM
Please help identify this Nikkor Lens (AF Nikkor 35-105mm 1:3.5-4.5mm) GTABuySell Digital Photography 5 06-07-2004 04:39 PM
DSLR' that take Nikkor lenses? ArtKramr Digital Photography 21 12-13-2003 05:38 PM
mounting nikkor lenses FRbud35 Digital Photography 1 08-13-2003 05:55 PM



Advertisments