View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
killwilly
Joined: 16 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 11:53 am Post subject: Canon "L" lenses compared with older MF lenses. |
|
|
killwilly wrote:
Not quite sure if this is the right place to post this, mods please move if not.
As a Canon user I visit a number of forums which are dedicated, more or less to Canon gear and the same claim has been posted hundreds of times. ' L glass is the best and nothing can beat it'. Is there anyone on this forum that has put this claim to the test and done a comparison between L lenses and the older manual focus lens, which can now be purchased for a fraction of the cost?
Since I am no longer able to afford these "super" lenses, I would be very interested to hear of any manual lens that does compare. _________________ Alan. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sadness
Joined: 16 Aug 2010 Posts: 49 Location: Constanta, Romania
|
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sadness wrote:
And now you started a War. But what is it good for ?
I use a Domiplan once in a while, for nothing else but for fun, I don't know if its lenses are of glass even, maybe plastic.
The best glass is the one that pleases you the most and not the one that is praised by others.
I think in one of this forum's posts there was a statement, once you go zeiss you never go back, or similar. _________________ My site motorai.ro as motorcycle addict, I post on the blog of the site.
casti moto piese moto accesorii moto echipamente moto |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 11012 Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Please look here: http://forum.mflenses.com/best-of-lenses-gallery-f37.html _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
killwilly
Joined: 16 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
killwilly wrote:
I have no intention of starting a war, or even a debate. I was just wondering if anyone owned and used both and had done a genuine comparison.
I have looked at the sample gallery, but you can look at samples forever and not reach a conclusion, unless two lenses have photographed the same subject under exactly the same conditions. _________________ Alan. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
my_photography
Joined: 03 Nov 2008 Posts: 2772 Location: Pearl of the Orient
Expire: 2016-12-25
|
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
my_photography wrote:
I am sure no one will argue if I say "L" lens are good lens. (They better be at that price). However not all "L" are made the same. A lot of older manual "L" lens and newer AF "L" lens differs in coating, glass elements etc. Thus, it is already difficult to compare "L" lens let alone comparing with other glasses with different formula and characteristic.
For example, I like photos taken with Helios 44 series lens. It is definitely not "L" price nor built quality. However, no "L" can produce that famous helios characteristic. But then again, there are also a lot of people who do not like the helios type of bokeh.
Perhaps if you are more specific at what focal length you are looking at, you might get more suggestions. _________________
Zeiss: CJZ Flektogon 20/2.8, CJZ Flektogon 20/4, , CJZ Pentacon 29/2.8, CJZ Flektogon 35/2.4, CJZ Pancolar 50/1.8, Tessar 50/2.8, Biotar 7.5cm/1.5, CJZ Pancolar 80/1.8, CJZ Sonnar 135/3.5, CJZ Pentacon 135/2.8 CJZ Sonnar 200/2.8
Other Germany: Meyer Primoplan 50/1.8, Meyer Trioplan 100/2.8
Takumar: SMC 50/1.4 Super Tak 55/2, Super Tak 85/1.9, S-M-C 135/3.5, Super Tak 150/4
Russian: Zenith 16/2.8, Mir-24M 2/35, Volna-9 50/2.8, Helios 44M (58/2), Helios 44M-3 MC (58/2), Helios 40 (85/1.5), Tair 11A (135/2.8 )
Others: Sears 28/2.8, Sankor 35/2.8, Enna M�nchen Tele-Ennalyt 135/3.5
Zoom Sigma Zoom 28-85/3.5-4.5
Last edited by my_photography on Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:17 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kram
Joined: 06 Feb 2010 Posts: 1344 Location: Portland, OR
|
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kram wrote:
Well, I've only rented L lenses, but I recently rented Canon's 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS. I had been shooting with a Nikkor 105/2.8 for macro.
While the Canon was perhaps slightly sharper, for the cost, the Nikkor 105 is better. FWIW, the IS did not have a significant affect in extreme macro mode.
The Nikkor 55/2.8 is also a superb lens. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008 Posts: 6950 Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
I have about 60 or so lenses. 3 of my lenses are L lenses. They are unquestionably my best lenses but not necessarily my favourite lenses.
Favourite lenses are Helios 44 (any version), Trioplan 100mm, Tair 11. Not really expensive lenses, but they seem to inspire some of my best pics. _________________ Casual attendance these days |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Posts: 755 Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
martinsmith99 wrote: |
3 of my lenses are L lenses. They are unquestionably my best lenses but not necessarily my favourite lenses.
|
+1 from me really. I worked hard to be able to afford to upgrade from, if you like, ordinary AF lenses and I'm not yet ready to say that such is the total dominance of MF that I don't need my L lenses but, why, sometimes I switch them from AF to MF. And that ought to satisfy both urges.
Could I identify a "favourite"? Nope. But then, nor could I identify my favourite rifle, my favourite music, my favourite food, my favourite bow tie, etc ad nauseam!
My favourite camera though is my 5DII _________________ I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
Back to top |
|
|
killwilly
Joined: 16 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
killwilly wrote:
Thanks guys for your replies.
Martin. It's interesting that you mention Helios 44 as being your favourite lens. I bought a Helios 44m-4 58mm off eBay only last week and so far it's proving to be a much sharper lens than the CZ 50/2.8.
Is there a way of finding if the lens is Soviet or Japanese manufacture?
The serial number is:- 87171087 _________________ Alan. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ZoneV
Joined: 09 Nov 2009 Posts: 1632 Location: Germany
Expire: 2011-12-02
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
ZoneV wrote:
Are not all Helios 44 from Soviet Union? I am not a specialist on Soviet lenses.
Canon L lenses seem to be very good, but I suppose Zeiss and Leica lenses are on the same level or even better.
I have no Canon EF L lens with AF, but some FD L lenses (24, 85, 300). I like them, but they are not my most used or most liked lenses. I prefer my Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2 and I am a big admirer of the Meyer Trioplan 100 with its special bokeh, too.
And I think I use more often my Helios 44 or even the Porst 135/1.8 with very bad reputation than I use my "better" Zeiss 50/1.4 (C/Y) - why? Perfect lenses are sometimes a bit boring! _________________ Camera modification, repair and DIY - some links to look through: http://www.4photos.de/camera-diy/index-en.html
I AM A LENS NERD!
Epis, Elmaron, Emerald, Ernostar, Helioplan and Heidosmat.
Epiotar, Kameraobjektiv, Anastigmat, Epis, Meganast, Magnagon, Quinar, Culmigon, Novotrinast, Novflexar, Colorplan, Sekor, Kinon, Talon, Telemegor, Xenon, Xenar, Ultra, Ultra Star. Tessar, Janar, Visionar, Kiptar, Kipronar and Rotelar.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rolf
Joined: 02 May 2009 Posts: 4123 Location: NRW/Germany
Expire: 2015-12-26
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rolf wrote:
I own 5 or 6 "L" lenses.
It is always a question of what I have to do. When I make for example a special journey or visit places which I do not visit every day, special situations etc. I will go with my "best" equipment - which means the chance to get images with perfect IQ, no blur, exact WB and exposure etc and this all together in a short time. Then I prefer only AF and these are my "L" lenses.
If I have time for shooting or at my daily walks etc. I like to go with MF lenses.
_________________ Rolf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
berraneck
Joined: 24 May 2009 Posts: 972 Location: prague, czech republic
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 1:01 pm Post subject: Re: Canon "L" lenses compared with older MF lenses |
|
|
berraneck wrote:
killwilly wrote: |
As a Canon user I visit a number of forums which are dedicated, more or less to Canon gear and the same claim has been posted hundreds of times. ' L glass is the best and nothing can beat it'. |
that´s true only when you compare all Canon EOS lenses - surely L is the best if the AF is a must, many Contax N lenses are better than Canon L and you have full AF capability even converted to EOS mount. if you stay with MF, there are plenty of better lenses (f.e. Zeiss 35/1,4 or 28/2 and more from Zeiss, Leica, Voigtlaender..) and many not better, but with unique characteristics which modern AF lenses don´t have - f.e. swirly bokeh of Zeiss Biotar or Helios 40 lenses _________________ equipment doesn´t count, good photographs do |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I think the op was asking what MF lenses will give him IQ of a similar level to what L glass can offer on average.
On example off the top of my head is the Tair-3C 4.5/300. I've never owned a Canon L 300mm but when I look at shots from expensive Canon glass I'm not seeing much better (if at all) than I see from the Tair.
I bought my Tair last year for 35ukp.
How much is a Canon L 300? _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008 Posts: 6622 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
I have the Canon 300/4L and it is very sharp wide open with very little CA. It's by far the best 300mm prime I've tried (and I have had several). Whilst the Tair 3 looks good value for money, I haven't seen images as sharp and free of CA as I've had from the Canon. BUT...I haven't tried the Tair myself yet, which I would need to do before I draw a full conclusion.
However...I much prefer the rendering of the Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 100-300/4.5-5.6 and would rather use that than my trusty 300/4L. _________________ Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uhoh7
Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uhoh7 wrote:
The lens widely considered to be the best in the FD line, without exception, the nFD 24/2, is not an L lens.
On the other hand there is an nFD 100-300 which has the L, and is nothing special.
That all said, the nFD 50/1.2 L may be the finest high speed lens ever made in terms of pure performance. Almost certainly it is the sharpest MF superspeed.
24/2:
the also superb nFD 20/2.8
_________________ Making MFlenses safe for the letter *L* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trifox
Joined: 14 May 2008 Posts: 3614 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-05-29
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
trifox wrote:
I am not going to answer the question which one is better - 'L' or non-L.
The 'L' stands officially for 'LUXURY'
and I must admit that's true..
I know Zeiss' performance but Canon is an optical giant - someone here would argue about this fact but Canon is a 'good man' !
They have done so much to optical improvements and their innovative approach is absolutely amazing.
Despite the fact that Canon is also producing a 'crap lenses' that compromise the optical quality, otherwise Canon is a great brand.
Manual focus lenses by Canon:
The FL and FD line is amazingly superb and I love them so much..
I have got 3 'L' lenses: 80-200 f4, 100-300 f5.6 and 85 f1.2 L and they're amazing but again different from Zeiss.
Zeiss was killed by Kyocera but Canon's brand keeps living.
Back to Canon lenses; another superb lenses without 'L' label:
FL 19 f3.5 - I have got one - with damaged coating - lack of contrast because of the coating issue. amazing colours - awaiting conversion
FL 35 f3.5 - killer - I have got one - amazing sharpness, absolutely true colours - there is not diff between colour space in the picture and reality.
FL 300 f2.8 Flourite - I have got one in FL mount - killer, rare, collectible item, heavy - and wow!
FL 135 f2.5 - killer - I have got one - stunning vintage colours!
Fl 100 f3.5 - amazing lens - I have got 2 copies - sharp, amazing colours
FL 55-135 f3.5 - absolutely amazing piece of glass and metal !!! Vintage and impressive engineering work
FD 50 f1.2 - superb lens - I have got one
FD 135 f2 - superb - I have got one
FD 100 f2 - absolutely amazing lens -- now quite expensive - I have got one - extremely compact!!
FD 28-85 - superb - I have got one - absolutely amazing engineering work -a little bit plastic but good
FD 24 f2.8 -- the quality may vary - this one has floating element -- if it's badly adjusted, it may have bad corners - otherwise superb sharp lens with little flare!
FD 80 f1.8 - absolutely great lens - true colours - red is red, green is green, blue is blue - I have just tested that one! Outstanding lens! Very small and very compact!
FD TS 35 f2.8 - no comment - I have converted 2 copies - and my copy is awaiting conversion! Absolutely flawless optics - the first TS lens for 35 mm camera system - amazing fact.
FD 55 f1.2 -- very good but I like the the lens rather than the performance. Nice engineering work!
FD 35-105 ASPH -- this one is a real surprise!..
FD 200 f4 Macro = stunning - I have done just conversion and test = wow lens.
FD 85 f1.2 ASPH -- no comment -- true diamond!
Finally, a few words about Canon FD 24 f2 - this lens is non-L version ... I have got one.
this lens is waiting in my shelf to be converted but I think that this one is the best wide angle in that focal length in the globe.
My opinion, of course..
tf _________________ Flickr.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008 Posts: 4569 Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:43 pm Post subject: Re: Canon "L" lenses compared with older MF lenses |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
killwilly wrote: |
...the same claim has been posted hundreds of times. ' L glass is the best and nothing can beat it'. |
I don't own any Canon L lens, I read are very good, some may be the best at their focal length, still the quoted claim strikes me as naive. _________________ my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008 Posts: 6622 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 9:11 pm Post subject: Re: Canon "L" lenses compared with older MF lenses |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
kuuan wrote: |
killwilly wrote: |
...the same claim has been posted hundreds of times. ' L glass is the best and nothing can beat it'. |
I don't own any Canon L lens, I read are very good, some may be the best at their focal length, still the quoted claim strikes me as naive. |
Agree, for example the 17-40/4L is not as sharp in the corners as some older primes (from what I've seen).
The new 70-200/2.8IS looks very good though I dug out some examples from my 300/4L as mentioned earlier:
Near 100% crop from the 300/4L wide open with a 1.4x TC attached
Slightly cropped with a Kenko 1.4x TC this time
300/4L only
_________________ Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
uhoh7 wrote: |
That all said, the nFD 50/1.2 L may be the finest high speed lens ever made in terms of pure performance. Almost certainly it is the sharpest MF superspeed.
|
*ahem* Uhoh, those of us who own the FD 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical may be inclined to disagree with this statement. But then I am admittedly biased. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uhoh7
Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA
|
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
uhoh7 wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
uhoh7 wrote: |
That all said, the nFD 50/1.2 L may be the finest high speed lens ever made in terms of pure performance. Almost certainly it is the sharpest MF superspeed.
|
*ahem* Uhoh, those of us who own the FD 85mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical may be inclined to disagree with this statement. But then I am admittedly biased. |
haha, I forgot about that one---fantastic lens. Maybe it is sharper than the 50/1.2 L _________________ Making MFlenses safe for the letter *L* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
Okay so now I'm curious. Have you had an opportunity to try out your 50/1.2 L against the old 55mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical? I've never owned either but I've always sort of considered the latter to be the equivalent to the 85 like mine, but as a 55mm. And howabout Canon's other 85's? Have you had a chance to compare the 85 Ls with your 50 L? _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Another really nice lens to add to that list, Stan - the FL 2.5/35.
Mine doesn't quite hit infinity after I hacked it to fit on my EOS, but it is a very sharp lens with extremely good colour rendition imho.
I forget whether this was f2.5 or f4 but to my eyes, it's very sharp.
_________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uhoh7
Joined: 24 Nov 2010 Posts: 1300 Location: Idaho, USA
|
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
uhoh7 wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
Okay so now I'm curious. Have you had an opportunity to try out your 50/1.2 L against the old 55mm f/1.2 SSC Aspherical? I've never owned either but I've always sort of considered the latter to be the equivalent to the 85 like mine, but as a 55mm. And howabout Canon's other 85's? Have you had a chance to compare the 85 Ls with your 50 L? |
My 50 L is a CV 50/1.1, hehe.
I've come close to bidding, and I've looked at many pics, and read the rants. What I gleen is the 50L is the penultimate of the superfast 50's and can shoot well in many conditions. The far more rare ASPH 55s, I read are great after dark, but not quite as steallar all around as the 50 L.
At around 500 USD it's a pretty good deal if you get a nice copy. Consider that OMs and Nikons go for nearly the same, and are a generation behind technically.
For bokeh the old FL 55s and the original LTM 50/1.2 have the flavors, but the 50 L seems fine--just a much more modern look like the nokton.
I would not mind having one, that's for sure. I should sell my nokton and buy one _________________ Making MFlenses safe for the letter *L* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DSG
Joined: 04 Mar 2007 Posts: 544 Location: London, UK.
|
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
DSG wrote:
I only have one L series lens, the FD 85mm f1.2 L, and its probably the best L series lens ever made, in my totally unbiased opinion
If it could focus to infinity then it would definitely be my favorite lens period but it cant so my other most favorite "L class" lens is my old FL 55mm f1.2, which is one of the sharpest lenses I have ever used, easily beating my supposedly stellar Zeiss 50mm f1.7 Planar T*.
I hear good very things about the Canon 135mm f2 L and I've seen some really great images taken with it...In all seriousness, it could well be the best L series lens ever made...But its high price means I will never get a chance at owning one. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Graham: Superb images!!! _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|