View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4573 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
BeritOlam wrote: |
That's what I needed to know. |
happy to hear that!
the original metal cap may look cool but it only stays on with friction
sorry for my insufficient english, I hope I can make this clear:
the most useful generic model 'squeezes' from two points from the 'inside' of the cap which is better than one which squeezes from two points at the outer ring of the cap because it can be put / removed even with a hood mounted. It looks like this:
best regards,
Andreas _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
+1
The best option for me too.
Rino. _________________ Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
darosk
Joined: 09 Apr 2009 Posts: 120 Location: Kota Kinabalu
|
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
darosk wrote:
Yes, seems most Takumar lens cap I acquire have trouble staying on lens. Sometime I dont even use the lens cap and just be careful. _________________ Daros K.
OM-D E-M5 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
2contagious
Joined: 08 Nov 2009 Posts: 14
|
Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
2contagious wrote:
hi, I bought this lens without knowing about the radioactive element inside it. now I am wondering whether I should sell it again on eBay or keep it. the fact that I might be exposed to radiation while using it scares the heck out of me. does anybody know how much radiation the Super-Takumar 50 f1.4 really emits and what the "acceptable" amount of radiation in terms of health and safety is? I can't find anything that really helps on the internet it's usually either people making fun of it, people saying that it is not dangerous at all, and people saying the opposite... so I am confused. can anyone help me? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008 Posts: 6627 Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
I an ME with a Nuclear Engineering minor. I have "some" connection with the industry.
1. It is not dangerous. It will not even register on a geiger counter. SOME radioactive lenses apparently will register, such as the famous Aero Ektar. Even so, its rather minor, and frankly anyones exposure to a lens would be very little. Its not going to be near you very much at all. Its not as if you will sleep with it under your pillow I think.
2. Natural background radiation varies so much around the earth, you would be surprised. Way, way more exposure range than any cumulative exposure from any lens, a factor of 4x from one place to another would not be unusual. If you are concerned, you should check whether your home is radioactive due to naturally occurring Radon gas (the biggest source) which depends on the local geology and the construction of your house, and b. the altitude at which you live; you want to be at sea-level to minimize it. And even with that, there has been no clear health effect found in differences in background radiation exposure. If anything, there is some support in the data for a BENEFIT from slightly higher background radiation (the hormesis effect).
3. Philosophically, I cannot understand why anyone would worry so much about very slight physical dangers. Life is for living, not preserving. We are all going to go, it doesn't matter all that much when it happens. Danger is good ! As Winston Churchill said, "There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at without result. " And thats a true thing.
So take out your Takumar lens, and use it for art with perhaps, if you like, the thrill of the knowledge of its radioactive parts. _________________ I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4573 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
I am very much against nuclear power, but I have never worried even a bit about using the S-M-C Tak 1.4/50mm:
_________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina
|
Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
I use my S-M-C 1,4 and not worry about nothing. I only enjoy the lens and the pics taken with it.
I read in a german forum that the konica 1,2/57 is so yellow 'cos is a radiactive lens too.
Wow.
Rino. _________________ Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
2contagious
Joined: 08 Nov 2009 Posts: 14
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
2contagious wrote:
I guess the fear mostly comes from not properly understanding radioactivity as well.. for example: when using it, I would be exposed to "that bit of radiation" it emits, but what about putting it somewhere.. will the radioactivity affect objects around it? as in... if I put it next to other lenses, will they be "contaminated" a bit and carry a bit of radioactivity? and will the inside of the camera be affected as well? or does the radioactivity stay in the lens ONLY and only affect objects/people while it is being used? in other words: does radioactivity leave traces or is it completely local? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008 Posts: 6627 Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 3:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
The simple answer here is no.
The types of particles it emits are not the sorts that would make other objects radioactive. They can initiate some chemical reactions, such as that which turns the glass yellow.
The radioactive source is extremely weak, only capable of creating sufficient chemical reactions in its own glass matrix to turn it yellow after forty years - and most of the alpha and beta particles that do that job are blocked by the glass and metal of the lens itself.
It would only be potentially dangerous to a human if this Thorium-impregnated glass were to be somehow ingested, such that the alpha and beta particles were directly absorbed by cells in human organs. Perhaps also if a thorium-glass eyepice were to be held up to the eye, millimeters away, for hours at a time every day, it might have some effect.
You don't need to worry about this lens in any way at all.
Update - This summary is from Oak Ridge National Laboratories (well, their university extension), on Thorium optics and exposure calculations -
http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/consumer%20products/cameralens.htm
They figure 0.7 millirem annually from normal use of a camera with a typical thorium lens, and up to 2 millirem for significant use, carrying it 30 days a year for 6 hours a day. I expect they are also making assumptions about the lens being carried close to the body.
NRC Occupational exposure annual limit is 5000mrem, and US average background radiation exposure is around 350mrem - so this exposure from thorium glass would be trivial. _________________ I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work.
Last edited by luisalegria on Mon Nov 09, 2009 4:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lwsy711
Joined: 21 Oct 2009 Posts: 230 Location: VA, US
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
lwsy711 wrote:
Radioactivity is everywhere in our life, the smoke sensor, cosmic ray, x-ray.......I think the fear comes from the idea of radioactivity turns something into yellow that seems to be very bad sign. Most people have no idea how many particles(not include photon) have hit their body everyday. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hinnerker
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 Posts: 929 Location: Germany near Kiel
Expire: 2015-08-09
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hinnerker wrote:
Yes, its a boring discussion, cause everybody who payed attention on school, and do understand the table of elements knows, that there was no danger (if he dont use the lens as a lollypop).
Its an Alpha emitter, with a reach of some inches.. not more.
Boring
Cheers
Henry _________________ some light-painting lens stuff..
... and an EOS 5D MKII
www.digicamclub.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008 Posts: 6627 Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
You do also get gamma from Thorium decay. _________________ I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
hinnerker
Joined: 17 Aug 2009 Posts: 929 Location: Germany near Kiel
Expire: 2015-08-09
|
Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hinnerker wrote:
You wont really discuss this.. or want you?
Dont do that with me.. i have to improve my technical english first.
Cheers
Henry _________________ some light-painting lens stuff..
... and an EOS 5D MKII
www.digicamclub.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008 Posts: 6627 Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
No, not really, just being pedantic.
Its not dangerous in any way. _________________ I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4573 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
anyway, it is a fantastic lens, it 'shines'
_________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
larsr
Joined: 25 Jun 2009 Posts: 272 Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
larsr wrote:
I recently got an SMC Pentax-M 50/1.4 for free, and I've understood it's pretty much the same lens as SMC Tak 50/1.4. Does anyone have more on this? I'm going to sell it soon anyway, but I'm thinking about trading it 1:1 for a Tak.. _________________ Lars
Bodies:
DSLR: Nikon D200
SLR: Nikon FA, Pentax Spotmatic SPII, Zeiss Ikon Icarex 35TM
35mm: Voigtl�nder Vitoret
Nikkor MF
24/2.8K AI'd, 28/2.8 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 Micro, 35-70/3.5 AIS, 85/1.8K AI'd, 100/2.8 Series E, 105/2.5 AI, 105/2.5 AIS, 135/3.5 AI, Nikkor 180/2.8 ED AIS, 200/4-Q AI'd, 300/4.5-H AI'd
M42
Misc: Vivitar 28/2.5, Chinon 28/2.8, Cosina Auto Cosinon 50/1.8, Revue Auto Revuenon 50/1.8, Mamiya 50/2, Auto Flex 55/1.7, Cosina Cosinon 135/2.8 MC, Vivitar 135/2.8, Petri 200/3.5 CC Auto
Zeiss: Carl Zeiss (Ikon) Tessar 50/2.8, CZJ Tessar 50/2.8, CZJ Pancolar Electric 50/1.8 MC, CZJ Biotar 58/2 T, CZJ Sonnar MC S 135/3.5
Asahi-Pentax: SMC-Takumar 55/1.8, Super-Takumar 105/2.8, SMC-Takumar 135/3.5
USSR: Mir-1 37/2.8 (1958 GP), Helios 44-2 58/2
Pentacon/Meyer: Pentacon 29/2.8 MC, Pentacon 50/1.8 MC Electric, Meyer G�rlitz Oreston 50/1.8, Meyer G�rlitz Orestor 135/2.8, Pentacon 200/4
Nikkor AF
50/1.8 D, 60/2.8 Micro, 55-200/4-5.6 G VR, 70-300/4-5.6 ED, 18-70/3.5-4.5 G
Wantlist
Nikkor 105/1.8, Nikkor 135/2
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
KUUAN
Your pics are fantastics. Here and in others places too.
I like your portraits very much.
You are one of who have decided to me to try the S-M-C- 1,4. Thanks.
Rino. _________________ Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4573 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
larsr wrote: |
I recently got an SMC Pentax-M 50/1.4 for free, and I've understood it's pretty much the same lens as SMC Tak 50/1.4. Does anyone have more on this? I'm going to sell it soon anyway, but I'm thinking about trading it 1:1 for a Tak.. |
Hi Lars,
I have not found out conclusively if the Pentax M 1.4/50 optically is identical to the Takumar 1.4/50 or not. I had taken a few shots with the M lens and these had busy highlights that I have not seen much with the Takumar. My initial thought was that the lens must be different, but on second thought it simply might have been caused by the content of the photo. _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4573 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
estudleon wrote: |
KUUAN
Your pics are fantastics. Here and in others places too.
I like your portraits very much.
You are one of who have decided to me to try the S-M-C- 1,4. Thanks.
Rino. |
thank you Rino
I am very happy that some of my photos were one of the reasons why you wanted this lens, because I know that you also like it very much
For me it is the ideal portrait lens
best regards and greetings,
Andreas _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Uzay
Joined: 16 May 2009 Posts: 92 Location: Turkey
|
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Uzay wrote:
Beautiful pics, mine is on the way
Edit:Finally i've received my S-M-C Takumar 50mm 1.4, do you know where can i find both caps for this lens? _________________ Helios 44-4
Jupiter-9
Samyang 85 1.4
Katana 135 2.8
Pancolar 50 1.8
Takumar 50 1.4
http://www.flickr.com/photos/uzaykisi/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
2contagious
Joined: 08 Nov 2009 Posts: 14
|
Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
2contagious wrote:
Hi,
what exactly is the difference between SMC Takumar 50mm f1.4 and the Super Takumar 50 f1.4? Is it true that the SMC version is not radioactive?
see you,
chris. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4573 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
there are actualy 3, Super Takumar, Super Multi Coated Takumar and SMC Takumar
the first two share the same all metal body but the Super Tak has simpler coating, the SMC has slightly different body sporting a rubberized focus ring and shares the coating of the S-M-C.
Early, maybe most Super Tak only have 6 aperture blades, S-M-C and SMC have 8
to my knowledge all three of them have radioactive glass _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
2contagious
Joined: 08 Nov 2009 Posts: 14
|
Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
2contagious wrote:
What about the SMC Takumar 55/2.0? did it have a thorium piece as well? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
urmelchen
Joined: 20 Nov 2008 Posts: 29
|
Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
urmelchen wrote:
2contagious wrote: |
Hi,
what exactly is the difference between SMC Takumar 50mm f1.4 and the Super Takumar 50 f1.4? Is it true that the SMC version is not radioactive?
see you,
chris. |
The S-M-C and SMC have more contrast at f1.4 because of the better coating. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4573 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
great photos taken with this lens:
http://www.flickriver.com/groups/takumar_50mm_f14/pool/interesting/
cheers,
kuuan _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|