Why can't a non-SLR have equivalent quality?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Prime, Jul 24, 2005.

  1. Prime

    Prime Guest

    I've been waiting and wondering when we will see this.

    I'm personally tired of carrying big cameras. I've got a great point and
    shoot 7mp. I would like some more lens flexibility but don't want to be
    burdened down by a SLR. I used a film SLR but found the size differential
    of a good point and shoot (for me) was too valuable to ignore.

    For example, I really like the Panasonic FZ5 - Leica lens, very small, 12x
    optical+ stabilized zoom. I almost bought the camera. Yet when I look at
    sample photos the 5mp sensor has noticable noise, even compared to my Sony
    DSC-P200.

    When and why don't we see a 6-8mp prosumer camera with an image sensor
    equivalent to one in a digital SLR? I would expect a major market for such
    a camera. Perhaps bigger than the smaller point and shoot cameras, but
    still a lot smaller than SLRs. And you wouldn't worry about dust on the
    sensor!
    Prime, Jul 24, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Prime

    l e o Guest

    Prime wrote:
    > I've been waiting and wondering when we will see this.
    >
    > I'm personally tired of carrying big cameras. I've got a great point and
    > shoot 7mp. I would like some more lens flexibility but don't want to be
    > burdened down by a SLR. I used a film SLR but found the size differential
    > of a good point and shoot (for me) was too valuable to ignore.
    >
    > For example, I really like the Panasonic FZ5 - Leica lens, very small, 12x
    > optical+ stabilized zoom. I almost bought the camera. Yet when I look at
    > sample photos the 5mp sensor has noticable noise, even compared to my Sony
    > DSC-P200.
    >
    > When and why don't we see a 6-8mp prosumer camera with an image sensor
    > equivalent to one in a digital SLR? I would expect a major market for such
    > a camera. Perhaps bigger than the smaller point and shoot cameras, but
    > still a lot smaller than SLRs. And you wouldn't worry about dust on the
    > sensor!


    Larger sensor requires larger, more expensive lenses. The fact is the
    current P&S's are good enough for the general public when use under
    optimal lighting condition. I wouldn't see the manufacturers want to
    sacrifice price and size for the mass market products.
    l e o, Jul 24, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Prime

    frederick Guest

    l e o wrote:

    > Prime wrote:
    >
    >> I've been waiting and wondering when we will see this.
    >>
    >> I'm personally tired of carrying big cameras. I've got a great point
    >> and shoot 7mp. I would like some more lens flexibility but don't want
    >> to be burdened down by a SLR. I used a film SLR but found the size
    >> differential of a good point and shoot (for me) was too valuable to
    >> ignore.
    >>
    >> For example, I really like the Panasonic FZ5 - Leica lens, very small,
    >> 12x optical+ stabilized zoom. I almost bought the camera. Yet when I
    >> look at sample photos the 5mp sensor has noticable noise, even
    >> compared to my Sony DSC-P200.
    >>
    >> When and why don't we see a 6-8mp prosumer camera with an image sensor
    >> equivalent to one in a digital SLR? I would expect a major market for
    >> such a camera. Perhaps bigger than the smaller point and shoot
    >> cameras, but still a lot smaller than SLRs. And you wouldn't worry
    >> about dust on the sensor!

    >
    >
    > Larger sensor requires larger, more expensive lenses. The fact is the
    > current P&S's are good enough for the general public when use under
    > optimal lighting condition. I wouldn't see the manufacturers want to
    > sacrifice price and size for the mass market products.



    When a zlr can have an electronic viewfinder that displays at least
    close to the full 8mp at 25fps with no (as in practically zero) delay,
    then a large sensor zlr makes sense. I'd buy one. The mirror on an slr
    is just an necessary evil - noisy, delicate, destined to fail in the
    end, and probably a significant cost component of a dslr.
    frederick, Jul 24, 2005
    #3
  4. Prime

    Skip M Guest

    "Prime" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns969CC61C14BDDPrimeFactor@216.196.97.142...
    > I've been waiting and wondering when we will see this.
    >
    > I'm personally tired of carrying big cameras. I've got a great point and
    > shoot 7mp. I would like some more lens flexibility but don't want to be
    > burdened down by a SLR. I used a film SLR but found the size differential
    > of a good point and shoot (for me) was too valuable to ignore.
    >
    > For example, I really like the Panasonic FZ5 - Leica lens, very small, 12x
    > optical+ stabilized zoom. I almost bought the camera. Yet when I look at
    > sample photos the 5mp sensor has noticable noise, even compared to my Sony
    > DSC-P200.
    >
    > When and why don't we see a 6-8mp prosumer camera with an image sensor
    > equivalent to one in a digital SLR? I would expect a major market for such
    > a camera. Perhaps bigger than the smaller point and shoot cameras, but
    > still a lot smaller than SLRs. And you wouldn't worry about dust on the
    > sensor!


    Compare the Canon Rebel XT/350D to the Olympus C-8080. Both are 8mp
    cameras, the Canon an SLR, the Oly a ZLR, and the Canon is lighter and
    smaller in a couple of dimensions, and is only marginally larger and heavier
    than the Panasonic you mention. Of course, add a lens and that changes
    somewhat.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
    Skip M, Jul 24, 2005
    #4
  5. Prime wrote:
    > I've been waiting and wondering when we will see this.
    >
    > I'm personally tired of carrying big cameras. I've got a great point
    > and shoot 7mp. I would like some more lens flexibility but don't want
    > to be burdened down by a SLR. I used a film SLR but found the size
    > differential of a good point and shoot (for me) was too valuable to
    > ignore.
    >
    > For example, I really like the Panasonic FZ5 - Leica lens, very
    > small, 12x optical+ stabilized zoom. I almost bought the camera. Yet
    > when I look at sample photos the 5mp sensor has noticable noise, even
    > compared to my Sony DSC-P200.
    >
    > When and why don't we see a 6-8mp prosumer camera with an image sensor
    > equivalent to one in a digital SLR? I would expect a major market for
    > such a camera. Perhaps bigger than the smaller point and shoot
    > cameras, but still a lot smaller than SLRs. And you wouldn't worry
    > about dust on the sensor!


    As soon was you make a sensor as big as the one in an SLR, all the lenses
    need to be as big and heavy as SLR lenses, so any size advantage is gone.
    There is one system (the 4/3 system) which has a sensor half the
    dimensions of an SLR, but the lenses so far seem to be about the same size
    and weight as SLR lenses so, for me, all the potential gain of the system
    is gone.

    The best P&S performance so far seems to be from the 7MP sensors, although
    the 8MP 8.8mm x 6.6mm sensors can be quite good as well. Look for the
    largest physical sensor size you can get. I have the FZ5, which I keep at
    its lowest ISO, and noise on prints up to 10 x 8 inches simply isn't an
    issue.

    David
    David J Taylor, Jul 24, 2005
    #5
  6. Skip M wrote:
    []
    > Compare the Canon Rebel XT/350D to the Olympus C-8080. Both are 8mp
    > cameras, the Canon an SLR, the Oly a ZLR, and the Canon is lighter and
    > smaller in a couple of dimensions, and is only marginally larger and
    > heavier than the Panasonic you mention. Of course, add a lens and
    > that changes somewhat.


    Canon 350D - 540g
    Panasonic FZ5 - 326g

    540g vs. 326g is marginal? It's 65% heavier. Now add Canon EF 75-300mm
    f4-5.6 USM image stabilised lens: 650g, making 1190g.

    It's great that those of us who do not wish to lug 1.2kg around all day
    have the choice of the much lighter system, and that those who want the
    better high-ISO performance have that option as well.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Jul 24, 2005
    #6
  7. Prime

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Prime wrote:
    > I've been waiting and wondering when we will see this.
    >
    > I'm personally tired of carrying big cameras. I've got a great point and
    > shoot 7mp. I would like some more lens flexibility but don't want to be
    > burdened down by a SLR. I used a film SLR but found the size differential
    > of a good point and shoot (for me) was too valuable to ignore.
    >
    > For example, I really like the Panasonic FZ5 - Leica lens, very small, 12x
    > optical+ stabilized zoom. I almost bought the camera. Yet when I look at
    > sample photos the 5mp sensor has noticable noise, even compared to my Sony
    > DSC-P200.
    >
    > When and why don't we see a 6-8mp prosumer camera with an image sensor
    > equivalent to one in a digital SLR? I would expect a major market for such
    > a camera. Perhaps bigger than the smaller point and shoot cameras, but
    > still a lot smaller than SLRs. And you wouldn't worry about dust on the
    > sensor!


    I am sure you will see such cameras in the near future, but right now
    the sensors are a bit more expensive than will fit into the current
    price niche for P*S cameras. Just be patient for another year or so.


    --
    Ron Hunter
    Ron Hunter, Jul 24, 2005
    #7
  8. Prime

    Alfred Molon Guest


    > Skip M wrote:
    > []
    > > Compare the Canon Rebel XT/350D to the Olympus C-8080. Both are 8mp
    > > cameras, the Canon an SLR, the Oly a ZLR, and the Canon is lighter and
    > > smaller in a couple of dimensions, and is only marginally larger and
    > > heavier than the Panasonic you mention. Of course, add a lens and
    > > that changes somewhat.


    How heavy and expensive is a 350D with a F2.4-3.5 28-140 zoom lens ?

    Don't forget that the lens of the 8080 has very little vignetting, which
    is not the case with most (D)SLR lenses and the one of the Canon Pro 1
    as well.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/
    Alfred Molon, Jul 24, 2005
    #8
  9. Prime

    Skip M Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote in
    message news:q4IEe.76115$...
    > Skip M wrote:
    > []
    >> Compare the Canon Rebel XT/350D to the Olympus C-8080. Both are 8mp
    >> cameras, the Canon an SLR, the Oly a ZLR, and the Canon is lighter and
    >> smaller in a couple of dimensions, and is only marginally larger and
    >> heavier than the Panasonic you mention. Of course, add a lens and
    >> that changes somewhat.

    >
    > Canon 350D - 540g
    > Panasonic FZ5 - 326g
    >
    > 540g vs. 326g is marginal? It's 65% heavier. Now add Canon EF 75-300mm
    > f4-5.6 USM image stabilised lens: 650g, making 1190g.
    >
    > It's great that those of us who do not wish to lug 1.2kg around all day
    > have the choice of the much lighter system, and that those who want the
    > better high-ISO performance have that option as well.
    >
    > Cheers,
    > David
    >

    In terms of ounces, that is 2.5 or so. Not huge in the "I can't carry this
    any longer" sense. And that lens makes the Canon a more capable unit than
    the FZ. Note that I did say adding a lens changes the equation.
    I agree, though, horses for courses...

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
    Skip M, Jul 24, 2005
    #9
  10. Prime

    Mike Ross Guest

    On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 21:28:24 -0500, Prime <>
    wrote:

    >When and why don't we see a 6-8mp prosumer camera with an image sensor
    >equivalent to one in a digital SLR?


    Perhaps wait for the Leica 'Digital M'?

    Better start saving for it, in fact...

    Mike
    --
    http://www.corestore.org
    'As I walk along these shores
    I am the history within'
    Mike Ross, Jul 24, 2005
    #10
  11. Prime

    Skip M Guest

    "Alfred Molon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    >> Skip M wrote:
    >> []
    >> > Compare the Canon Rebel XT/350D to the Olympus C-8080. Both are 8mp
    >> > cameras, the Canon an SLR, the Oly a ZLR, and the Canon is lighter and
    >> > smaller in a couple of dimensions, and is only marginally larger and
    >> > heavier than the Panasonic you mention. Of course, add a lens and
    >> > that changes somewhat.

    >
    > How heavy and expensive is a 350D with a F2.4-3.5 28-140 zoom lens ?
    >
    > Don't forget that the lens of the 8080 has very little vignetting, which
    > is not the case with most (D)SLR lenses and the one of the Canon Pro 1
    > as well.


    A Canon 350D with a 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS USM would run about $1400 And the
    sensor size, which you, Alfred, always seem to discount, will get you,
    overall, better images than the FZ, even without considering the difference
    between 5mp and 8mp. The Canon's sensor is 22.2mm x 14.8mm. The Panasonics
    checks in at, what, 8mm x 6mm? So the better ISO performance of the Canon
    will make up for the slower lens. And that lens won't give you any
    vignetting on the APS-C sensor. I've had that lens on a 20D for nearly a
    year now, and never seen any evidence of vignetting. I did on the wide end,
    wide open, with my film cameras, but, for obvious reasons, that hasn't been
    a problem with the digital.
    Further, the Canon gives you the option of wider, or longer, lenses, and
    faster ones, than the Panasonic can.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
    Skip M, Jul 24, 2005
    #11
  12. Skip M wrote:
    > "David J Taylor"
    > <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    > wrote in message
    > news:q4IEe.76115$...
    >> Skip M wrote:
    >> []
    >>> Compare the Canon Rebel XT/350D to the Olympus C-8080. Both are 8mp
    >>> cameras, the Canon an SLR, the Oly a ZLR, and the Canon is lighter
    >>> and smaller in a couple of dimensions, and is only marginally
    >>> larger and heavier than the Panasonic you mention. Of course, add
    >>> a lens and that changes somewhat.

    >>
    >> Canon 350D - 540g
    >> Panasonic FZ5 - 326g
    >>
    >> 540g vs. 326g is marginal? It's 65% heavier. Now add Canon EF
    >> 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM image stabilised lens: 650g, making 1190g.
    >>
    >> It's great that those of us who do not wish to lug 1.2kg around all
    >> day have the choice of the much lighter system, and that those who
    >> want the better high-ISO performance have that option as well.
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> David
    >>

    > In terms of ounces, that is 2.5 or so. Not huge in the "I can't
    > carry this any longer" sense. And that lens makes the Canon a more
    > capable unit than the FZ. Note that I did say adding a lens changes
    > the equation. I agree, though, horses for courses...


    Just for the record, 1.2kg is two and a half 1lb bags of sugar - quite a
    lot to have hanging round your neck. Of course, if you /need/ the extra
    capability, so be it.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, Jul 24, 2005
    #12
  13. In article <9wNEe.76254$>, David J
    Taylor
    <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    wrote:

    > Just for the record, 1.2kg is two and a half 1lb bags of sugar - quite a
    > lot to have hanging round your neck. Of course, if you /need/ the extra
    > capability, so be it.


    For the next few days I'll have my 10D with Big Ed hanging on my
    shoulder. It's no biggie, but then I'm used to packing an electric
    Hasselblad around.
    Randall Ainsworth, Jul 24, 2005
    #13
  14. Prime

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <240720050901581727%>,
    Randall Ainsworth <> wrote:
    >In article <9wNEe.76254$>, David J
    >Taylor
    ><-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    >wrote:
    >
    >> Just for the record, 1.2kg is two and a half 1lb bags of sugar - quite a
    >> lot to have hanging round your neck. Of course, if you /need/ the extra
    >> capability, so be it.

    >
    >For the next few days I'll have my 10D with Big Ed hanging on my
    >shoulder. It's no biggie, but then I'm used to packing an electric
    >Hasselblad around.


    Last weekend, I did the Snowdon Horseshoe hike/scramble in Wales. 7 miles,
    1000 metres of ascent, and much of it needed to be done on all-fours. It was
    sunny and hot (pushing 30 Celsius and quite humid). I did the whole thing
    with just shy of 10 kilos of large format gear on my back, as well as a
    Mamiya 7 medium format for backup. Heavy, but worth it. Ended up taking
    this:

    http://narcissus.dyndns.org/Chris/Snowdon.jpg

    In the full-res scan, not only can you see individual people on the top of
    the mountain (you can just about make out where they are in the JPEG - the
    little dots on the ridge are people), you can also distingish their limbs.
    Chris Brown, Jul 24, 2005
    #14
  15. Prime

    Paul Mitchum Guest

    Alfred Molon <> wrote:

    > Don't forget that the lens of the 8080 has very little vignetting, which
    > is not the case with most (D)SLR lenses


    What lenses are you talking about? I have zero vignetting problems with
    any of my lenses. In fact, the crop factor means that lenses which might
    vignette on film are much less likely to with a DSLR.
    Paul Mitchum, Jul 24, 2005
    #15
  16. Prime

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <1h07g5s.qee8ds19i7h7fN%0m>, Paul Mitchum
    says...

    > What lenses are you talking about? I have zero vignetting problems with
    > any of my lenses. In fact, the crop factor means that lenses which might
    > vignette on film are much less likely to with a DSLR.


    The lenses used for the tests in the review sites, which have more or
    less big vignetting issues. Here is an example:

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page17.asp
    "The EF-S 18 - 55 mm lens did exhibit some visible lens shading at full
    wide angle and maximum aperture"

    If you need a lens with a 58mm diameter to have no vignetting with a
    8.8x6.6 mm sensor, you'll need a lens with roughly twice the diameter to
    have no vignetting issues with an APS sized sensor.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/
    Alfred Molon, Jul 24, 2005
    #16
  17. Prime

    Colin D Guest

    Alfred Molon wrote:
    >
    > In article <1h07g5s.qee8ds19i7h7fN%0m>, Paul Mitchum
    > says...
    >
    > > What lenses are you talking about? I have zero vignetting problems with
    > > any of my lenses. In fact, the crop factor means that lenses which might
    > > vignette on film are much less likely to with a DSLR.

    >
    > The lenses used for the tests in the review sites, which have more or
    > less big vignetting issues. Here is an example:
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page17.asp
    > "The EF-S 18 - 55 mm lens did exhibit some visible lens shading at full
    > wide angle and maximum aperture"
    >
    > If you need a lens with a 58mm diameter to have no vignetting with a
    > 8.8x6.6 mm sensor, you'll need a lens with roughly twice the diameter to
    > have no vignetting issues with an APS sized sensor.
    > --

    *All* lenses vignette to some degree, specially WA lenses. But it's
    moot, since readily available - some even free - software will remove
    vignetting, as well as barrel/pincushion distortion, lateral CA, and
    other minor defects in digital images. The two problems software cannot
    fully handle are detail vs noise, and too much DoF, and that is where
    the large-sensor dslr wins hands down.

    Colin D
    Colin D, Jul 24, 2005
    #17
  18. Prime

    Colin D Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    > Skip M wrote:
    > > "David J Taylor"
    > > <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid>
    > > wrote in message
    > > news:q4IEe.76115$...
    > >> Skip M wrote:
    > >> []
    > >>> Compare the Canon Rebel XT/350D to the Olympus C-8080. Both are 8mp
    > >>> cameras, the Canon an SLR, the Oly a ZLR, and the Canon is lighter
    > >>> and smaller in a couple of dimensions, and is only marginally
    > >>> larger and heavier than the Panasonic you mention. Of course, add
    > >>> a lens and that changes somewhat.
    > >>
    > >> Canon 350D - 540g
    > >> Panasonic FZ5 - 326g
    > >>
    > >> 540g vs. 326g is marginal? It's 65% heavier. Now add Canon EF
    > >> 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM image stabilised lens: 650g, making 1190g.
    > >>
    > >> It's great that those of us who do not wish to lug 1.2kg around all
    > >> day have the choice of the much lighter system, and that those who
    > >> want the better high-ISO performance have that option as well.
    > >>
    > >> Cheers,
    > >> David
    > >>

    > > In terms of ounces, that is 2.5 or so. Not huge in the "I can't
    > > carry this any longer" sense. And that lens makes the Canon a more
    > > capable unit than the FZ. Note that I did say adding a lens changes
    > > the equation. I agree, though, horses for courses...

    >
    > Just for the record, 1.2kg is two and a half 1lb bags of sugar - quite a
    > lot to have hanging round your neck. Of course, if you /need/ the extra
    > capability, so be it.
    >

    Or 2½ pounds of lead, or feathers ...

    Colin D
    Colin D, Jul 24, 2005
    #18
  19. Prime

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <42E41C4F.EA60F70@killspam.127.0.0.1>, Colin D says...

    > *All* lenses vignette to some degree, specially WA lenses. But it's
    > moot, since readily available - some even free - software will remove
    > vignetting, as well as barrel/pincushion distortion, lateral CA, and
    > other minor defects in digital images. The two problems software cannot
    > fully handle are detail vs noise, and too much DoF, and that is where
    > the large-sensor dslr wins hands down.


    A problem which software cannot solve is not enough DOF. Too much DOF
    can be easily reduced by software, by selectively blurring the
    background. As for noise, if you shoot at lowest ISO with a P&S you get
    noise levels low enough not to matter in most situations.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus E300 resource - http://myolympus.org/E300/
    Alfred Molon, Jul 25, 2005
    #19
  20. Prime

    Paul Mitchum Guest

    Alfred Molon <> wrote:

    > In article <1h07g5s.qee8ds19i7h7fN%0m>, Paul Mitchum
    > says...
    > > Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Don't forget that the lens of the 8080 has very little vignetting,
    > > > which is not the case with most (D)SLR lenses

    > >
    > > What lenses are you talking about? I have zero vignetting problems with
    > > any of my lenses. In fact, the crop factor means that lenses which might
    > > vignette on film are much less likely to with a DSLR.

    >
    > The lenses used for the tests in the review sites, which have more or less
    > big vignetting issues. Here is an example:
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page17.asp
    > "The EF-S 18 - 55 mm lens did exhibit some visible lens shading at full
    > wide angle and maximum aperture"


    So a single lens, at full wide-angle and maximum aperture, exhibited
    some vignetting (the same issue you say exists with the C-8080), which
    somehow to you means that *most* DSLR lenses have vignetting problems

    > If you need a lens with a 58mm diameter to have no vignetting with a
    > 8.8x6.6 mm sensor, you'll need a lens with roughly twice the diameter to
    > have no vignetting issues with an APS sized sensor.


    This is true of all formats. The bigger the format, the larger the lens
    needed. Unless you're doing pinhole photography... But the point is that
    if you use a film lens on a digital SLR, vignetting problems pretty much
    get cropped away. And if you use the made-for-digital lenses (with their
    smaller image circle), then vignetting *might* be an issue.

    I have a friend who has the C-8080 and loves it. I was considering
    getting one instead of the *ist DS. But the ability to use older lenses
    on the DSLR appealed.
    Paul Mitchum, Jul 25, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. David J Taylor

    Re: 8Mp Digital The Theoretical 35mm Quality Equivalent

    David J Taylor, Dec 6, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    384
  2. Newsgroups
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    416
    ASAAR
    Jun 1, 2005
  3. Dave
    Replies:
    40
    Views:
    1,905
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Apr 11, 2007
  4. Aaron Kuperman

    How many megapixcels equivalent to 35 mm in quality

    Aaron Kuperman, May 29, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    51
    Views:
    1,429
    Stefan Patric
    Jun 17, 2008
  5. BigRich
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    291
    PeterN
    Feb 17, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page