NEED SOME HELP WITH LENS SELECTION

Started Feb 22, 2013 | Discussions
WaltKnapp
Forum ProPosts: 13,705
Like?
Re: NEED SOME HELP WITH LENS SELECTION
In reply to Answell, Feb 22, 2013

Answell wrote:

My question is: Until I decide which camera to keep ( or I may end up keeping both) as a walk around do all lens, I have been looking at the Sony 18-250 mm, Sigma 18-250mm or the Tamron 18-250mm. I have no experience with any of these lenses , so I am asking for serious advise on which of the 3 is the better lens, or another suggestion would help too.

My reason for this is to keep the Nikon D300s as my birding camera, and the Sony as my everyday camera., and if I did this, then instead of having so many Minolta lenses, I could just have one. I would keep the 28 & 50mm however.

Well, you are looking one generation back, older lens designs.

Tamron made the Sony 18-250, only slight differences between it and the Tamron 18-250.  However, Tamron has discontinued the 18-250 in favor of it's replacement, the 18-270.  The 18-270 is simply a better lens, not only incremental improvement in IQ, but focus is faster and silent. It's a excellent lens for this type and generally holds it's own against shorter zooms in the same price range.

I've stepped through these superzooms as they have evolved, started with the 18-200, then the Sony 18-250 and ever since it came out the 18-270. Each step has been improvements, and not just in longer focal length. I would not go back to the previous versions now. I have an extensive A mount lens set including many of the best A mount lenses.  But a one lens walkabout lens is often the best thing to be carrying in my outdoor, nature and landscape shooting.

I shoot with several a700s and the 18-270 is always ready to go on one of them, it sees a lot of use. (my other a700s generally have long tele and macro lenses on them so I don't have to do much lens changing)  With the extensive use mine has seen there is some zoom creep, but for me that does not create problems. And the previous generations also had creep with lots of use.

I think you would find the 18-270 a excellent choice as a one lens walkabout lens to cover lots of photography.  And it's what I'd recommend for that usage.

As a farther note I don't recommend building up multiple systems with incompatible mounts.  It always results in carting more and more cost and equipment to maintain. Our load can get heavy enough without doing that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jeadm
Contributing MemberPosts: 624Gear list
Like?
Re: I didn't like the super zoom
In reply to Answell, Feb 22, 2013

Well you have an interesting arsenal of lenses already.  Maybe there isn't much more you need to do until you've decided?

Otherwise I would go with used gear if you're looking for better than superzoom quality.  For highest IQ cheap I saw KEH had the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 for $330-350 which is a nice highly regarded lens, and probably a keeper even if you decide to go Sony and purchase more expensive glass.  It's lightyears better than your 18-70 (scorned by many) to be certain, the weakest in your collection IMO and probably the range you should put the most focus on improving.  The Sony 18-135 fills a bigger gap, sells for around the same price used as the Tamron but not as sharp.  The new Sigma 18-250 is $399 now so not much more, but then you're back to superzooms again.

You go much more than that and then you're getting into the higher end glass that you mentioned.

Actually my experience is similar.  I shot Minolta back in film days, went Canon in digital for years (most recent 60D), then to Sony most recently.  Hedged my bets when I returned, trying to decide which system to go with and which to get rid of.  So I did what any shameless gearhead would do:  kept both and spent more than I should.

But my Canon is sorely neglected these days.

 Jeadm's gear list:Jeadm's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Sony SLT-A57 Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX Sony 85mm F2.8 SAM Sony DT 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 SAM +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Brad109
Junior MemberPosts: 37
Like?
Re: NEED SOME HELP WITH LENS SELECTION
In reply to Jeadm, Feb 22, 2013

Well, I'll play devil's advocate. I also had the older sigma 18-250 HSM OS. I had it on an a65 first, and it had really bad back focus issues, especially at larger apertures. I sent it back to sigma twice and it came back both times with the same problem. I ended up selling the a65 and getting an a77, mainly for the micro focus adjustment. Same issues with the a77 and never could get the focus adjusted to be decent at both ends of the zoom range. Didn't have that problem with my beercan and 16-50. So I sold the sigma. Apparently there are good copies like the other guys in this thread have, I hope you get a good one.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,245Gear list
Like?
Re: NEED SOME HELP WITH LENS SELECTION
In reply to WaltKnapp, Feb 22, 2013

> "The 18-270 is simply a better lens"

That is not what I've seen.

http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=35

It shows that under various conditions, that the 270 is worse in quality than the 250 is.

And here is a quick comparison of the 270 vs telelenses, where 55-300 could be a doable alternative when you're willing to put up with carrying just two lenses. The payback is big IMO, because the IQ is much better than the 270.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/98962383/Sony%2055-300_100mm.JPG

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/98962383/Tamron%2018-270_100mm.JPG

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/98962383/Sony%20100M_f4.5.JPG

There are a number of other reviews I've seen. One guy standing in his backyard taking carefully controlled shots, also showed the 270 to be not the greatest of the super zooms. I can't immediately find this review.

The 18-270 is very handy. But it's a compromise in IQ.

On a side note, I have this Sony 55-200 lens that reaches *further* than the Tamron 18-250, go figure. IQ of the 55-200 is much better as well.

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jeadm
Contributing MemberPosts: 624Gear list
Like?
Re: NEED SOME HELP WITH LENS SELECTION
In reply to 123Mike, Feb 22, 2013

Welcome back Mike.

Bottom line, superzooms are always a compromise but they serve a useful purpose.  Give me a prime at every focal length I need and I'm set.  Unfortunately just not always practical (let alone affordable); hence the zoom lens.  Anytime a zoom lens is picked, it's a compromise you can live with, and one most all of us are used to making.

Wholeheartedly concur with your Tamron 17-50 recommendation.

 Jeadm's gear list:Jeadm's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Sony SLT-A57 Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX Sony 85mm F2.8 SAM Sony DT 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 SAM +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Answell
Contributing MemberPosts: 940Gear list
Like?
Re: I didn't like the super zoom
In reply to Jeadm, Feb 22, 2013

Jeadm wrote:

Actually my experience is similar. I shot Minolta back in film days, went Canon in digital for years (most recent 60D), then to Sony most recently. Hedged my bets when I returned, trying to decide which system to go with and which to get rid of. So I did what any shameless gearhead would do: kept both and spent more than I should.

All of 18 years, I had the same film camera . Minolta X700 (I think) I loved that camera, and all of the Minolta lenses. It was still like new after 18 years , and I got a good buck on trade when digital was just coming in. My first was a Canon D60, the I ended up going Nikon. Nikon D70,80,90,D300,D300s.

Cheers

But my Canon is sorely neglected these days.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Amateur Sony Shooter
Senior MemberPosts: 5,316Gear list
Like?
How about Sony Zeiss 16-80?
In reply to Answell, Feb 22, 2013

It's an older design (screw driven = noisy video) but it has very useful range, and its very lightweight. I also had it for about a year before moving to FF body. In many cases I never miss the extra reach of my superzoom because I can simply crop the image, and that lens is very sharp even in it's maximum aperture. Alternatively you can also consider Sony'e new DT 18-135 SAM which is little slower (aperture) than Zeiss 16-80 but it's quieter and offering little longer range.

With one of these lenses (plus one prime such as DT35/1.8, DT50/1.8, or even 85/2.8 SAM) you are pretty much all set to explore Sony system. If you like it's colour, extra dynamic range in RAW file, and all the benefits from SLT mirror then you can further your invest, if not you just sell them off. These lenses are very popular among Sony shooters so you will offload them no problem.

 Amateur Sony Shooter's gear list:Amateur Sony Shooter's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 7D Sony SLT-A99 Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G Sony 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
craig66
Regular MemberPosts: 357Gear list
Like?
Re: I didn't like the super zoom
In reply to 123Mike, Feb 23, 2013

123Mike wrote:

I've been looking at the samples of the new Sony 55-300, and it is *quite* the gem. It seems to be able to compete with the actual G lenses, and it appears better than the Min 100-300 APO and the Tam 70-300 which is very popular.

Personally, if you can get comfortable with swapping lenses, I'd aim for a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 + Sony 55-300. Then sell most if not all your other lenses. The Tam might obsolete your Min 50/1.7 as well, which needs stopping down anyway. The 17-50 is *quite* sharp at 50 wide open.

I've had the 55-300 DT for a couple of weeks and I must say I'm really impressed. MUCH better on all counts than the 55-200 which I also own. Sharper at f5.6 at 300mm than the 55-200 at 200mm at any aperture. Comparable to the Tamron 200-500 at 300mm. I've had several attempts at test shots on a tripod comparing the 55-300 at similar focal length to the Tamron 90mm macro. I can't separate them sharpness wise, though the Tammy may have very slightly better contrast.

It does f4.5 to 150mm and f5 to 200mm, so you are not losing much speed wise to the beer can.

I don't have the Tamron 17-50, though I plan to get one to replace the kit lens. The combination of Tam 17-50 and Sony 55-300 may the best IQ for dollar you can get in a two lens set, and among the most light weight too.

 craig66's gear list:craig66's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sony DT 55-300mm F4.5-5.6 SAM Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP AF 200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Answell
Contributing MemberPosts: 940Gear list
Like?
Re: How about Sony Zeiss 16-80?
In reply to Amateur Sony Shooter, Feb 23, 2013

I am truly looking at the Sony 18-135mm. I will do some more research on it , though.

This seems like a comfortable lens for everyday use

Thanks

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
benholdeman
Junior MemberPosts: 35
Like?
Re: NEED SOME HELP WITH LENS SELECTION
In reply to Answell, Feb 23, 2013

I don't think I saw the Minolta 28-135 f4-4.5 mentioned. This lens is very, very sharp (especially for a walk-around). This works very well with the 24mp sensor of the a65 or a77.

It is built like tank and focuses quickly. It also has an interesting Macro mode that allows the lens to almost touch your subject.

It does have a few quirks that take a little getting used to like how it handles (or rather doesn't) bright lighting sources outside the scene. You basically have to get an aftermarket lens hood to go with it.

The other frustrating quirk is the minimum focus distance when not in the special MF only Macro mode.

But if you are willing to work with its small weaknesses, this lens will produce some outstanding pics.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,245Gear list
Like?
Secret Handshake quircks
In reply to benholdeman, Feb 23, 2013
  • Subject must be 2+ meters away
  • It's absurdly heavy
  • Worse zoom creep ever
  • Hazing and veiling and not sharp wide open
  • Backfocus problems because AF focuses wide open. Stopping down shifts focus because previous problems.
  • Glare
  • Tam 17-50 2.8 much sharper
  • Sony 55-200 sharper
  • Min 28-105 xi sharper

The problem is that wide open it suffers from veiling and hazing and softness, screwing up the AF system.

My choice of lenses is now the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 + the new Sony 55-300. (I don't have the latter, have the 55-200 instead).

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,245Gear list
Like?
+1
In reply to craig66, Feb 23, 2013

I have the Tam 17-50 2.8 and I can definitely say that it opens up a lot of possibilities. It's very sharp at 50 2.8 I find. At 17 the AF appears to have trouble determining the correct distance sometimes. The solution there is to zoom in, focus, zoom out, and then snap. But even a partial zoom in, and the issue goes away. I think this is completely an AF camera issue, and nothing to do with the lens. There are no smarts inside the lens I think.
Anyway, I've been taking many more indoor low light photos without flash. I take a bunch of burst shots, and then hand pick the sharp ones. Amazing results. Totally recommend this lens. Some claim that the kit lens is just as sharp. Noway hosay. The Tam kills it at much wider apertures even. It's way more tack sharp.

I have the 55-200 and I'm looking at the 55-300. Various samples online shows how darn good it is. I've seen claims that it can actually compete with the G lenses (center, not corners).

But I've found my 55-200 also very very sharp. I've never been disappointed with it, and it's always been one of my favorite, and at times my most favorite lens, right from the getgo. I'd love to see a good accurate critical comparison of the 55-200 and 55-300. Do you know of any?

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,245Gear list
Like?
18-135 combos getting canceled
In reply to Jeadm, Feb 23, 2013

Apparently, the combos that include the 18-135 are getting canceled. I'm surprised to see the A37 with it still being offered. Might be the last combo. Perhaps BH inventory isn't even correct. The A57 and A65 and A77 combos with it were taken away late last year I think.

It seems the only way to buy them is at the big fat profit margins.

But it's not my favorite combo though. My choice is the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 + Sony 55-300. If you're *really* critical about precision and sharpness *and* you're on a budget.

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
craig66
Regular MemberPosts: 357Gear list
Like?
Re: +1
In reply to 123Mike, Feb 23, 2013

123Mike wrote:

But I've found my 55-200 also very very sharp. I've never been disappointed with it, and it's always been one of my favorite, and at times my most favorite lens, right from the getgo. I'd love to see a good accurate critical comparison of the 55-200 and 55-300. Do you know of any?

No I don't but I would be interested to see a shoot out with these and the Tamron 70-300 USD and Sony 70-300G.

There's no doubt that my 55-300 is much better than my 55-200, but I did buy the latter used and it's possible that my sample is not up to scratch.

As for kits with the 18-135, Hong Kong sellers still have A65+16-135 going on eBay for about $870 AUD shipped. In Australia this is a great deal because there is no import duty or any charges on goods of value less than $1000. In other countries, of course, things may be different. I've bought stuff from Hong Kong sellers and never had any problem at all. I've just bough a Nissin Di866 flash from a HK seller, expecting delivery tomorrow, for $238 shipped . "Bricks and Mortar" price in Australia -$449. Why wouldn't you?

 craig66's gear list:craig66's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sony DT 55-300mm F4.5-5.6 SAM Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP AF 200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PeteC21
Contributing MemberPosts: 536Gear list
Like?
Re: NEED SOME HELP WITH LENS SELECTION
In reply to Answell, Feb 24, 2013

For travel I would recommend an all in one such as the Sony 18-250, Sigma 18-250, or the Tamron 18-270. Sigma is revising their product offering and a number of lenses in the current product offering are on sale, $150 off in this case.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Zoom+Focal+Lengths_18-270mm&ci=274&N=4288584247+4108103563+4108103536+4261208188+4261208187

-- hide signature --

"If I knew how to take a good photograph, I'd do it every time." - Robert Doisneau

 PeteC21's gear list:PeteC21's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony SLT-A77 Sony a6000 Sony 70-400mm F4-5.6 G SSM Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ed at Ridersite
Forum ProPosts: 15,494
Like?
Re: Secret Handshake quircks
In reply to 123Mike, Feb 24, 2013

123Mike wrote:

  • Subject must be 2+ meters away
  • It's absurdly heavy
  • Worse zoom creep ever
  • Hazing and veiling and not sharp wide open
  • Backfocus problems because AF focuses wide open. Stopping down shifts focus because previous problems.
  • Glare
  • Tam 17-50 2.8 much sharper
  • Sony 55-200 sharper
  • Min 28-105 xi sharper

If you actually ever used this lens, you must have had a bad copy.  Mine is tack sharp wide open throughout the range.  No zoom creep what so ever.  No focusing issues.  Minimum focus is 1.5 meters - not good, but not what you say.  Weight is 750g, not light, but not as heavy as the Ziess 24-70mm.

-- hide signature --

AEH
http://aehass.zenfolio.com/
http://aehass.zenfolio.com/blog
Question: What do you do all week?
Answer: Mon to Fri. Nothing, Sat & Sun I rest!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Answell
Contributing MemberPosts: 940Gear list
Like?
Re: +1
In reply to craig66, Feb 25, 2013

craig66 wrote:

123Mike wrote:

But I've found my 55-200 also very very sharp. I've never been disappointed with it, and it's always been one of my favorite, and at times my most favorite lens, right from the getgo. I'd love to see a good accurate critical comparison of the 55-200 and 55-300. Do you know of any?

No I don't but I would be interested to see a shoot out with these and the Tamron 70-300 USD and Sony 70-300G.

There's no doubt that my 55-300 is much better than my 55-200, but I did buy the latter used and it's possible that my sample is not up to scratch.

As for kits with the 18-135, Hong Kong sellers still have A65+16-135 going on eBay for about $870 AUD shipped. In Australia this is a great deal because there is no import duty or any charges on goods of value less than $1000. In other countries, of course, things may be different. I've bought stuff from Hong Kong sellers and never had any problem at all. I've just bough a Nissin Di866 flash from a HK seller, expecting delivery tomorrow, for $238 shipped . "Bricks and Mortar" price in Australia -$449. Why wouldn't you?

I am sorry that I have not replied to some of the suggestions posted, but I have been very busy reading reviews of all the possible lenses that I want to buy, and with the exception of the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, I am not convinced that I want any of the others. To be honest, apart from the it being a faster lens, I am also not convinced that it is any better (sharper) than the Minolta 24-85mm that I have been using. This is my opinion only, so don't shoot me. I am thinking that my choices the  so far is to keep the 50mm 1.7, the 28mm 2.8 the (beercan) 70-210mm and the 24-85mm. It is not my only camera as mentioned in my post. I have all of the faster glasses for the Nikon D300s, and telephoto lens as well for my needs. Your responses are appreciated however .

I would like to take this opportunity to follow up on this post, as I do think that we should spend our money more wisely, and stop giving in to the big box office retailers  who is governed by the manufacturer.  Photography as it is, is  already a very expensive hobby , and make it more so by buying new lenses at these inflated prices. I have good lenses for the Nikon, but each, and everyone is a used lens purchased on ebay in near to new condition at a fraction of the price . I am not the least bit concerned about the manufacture's warranty, as in my experience so far, I have yet to send any of them anywhere for service.

If I had the choice to buy every lens or camera that I want .. it would be from a seller internationally. South Korea, Australia, Honk Hong, and so on. Not only are their prices better, the service is impeccable , the lens are as advertised, the shipping is most times free, I receive it in half the time it takes to get it from the US , (thanks to our customs agencies for this) and  again, no inflated shipping charges  as buyers like me are beginning to dislike with the ebay sellers from the US. No problem if you live there, but as soon as it is international, they want 3 to 4 times more than anywhere else, especially for shipping. If we are to support our countries, and stop spending abroad, our sellers need to change, and resist the desire to keep inflating their prices, charging so much for shipping, and taking so long to send the product after it is paid for.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,245Gear list
Like?
Re: +1
In reply to Answell, Feb 25, 2013

Hello Answell,

Tamron 17-50mm 2.8... I am also not convinced that it is any better (sharper) than the Minolta 24-85mm that I have been using.

Purportedly the 24-85 requires stopping down, whereas I can clearly see that most of my Tamron shots are tack sharp wide open. Faster means doing things in side you'd otherwise would not.

keep the 50mm 1.7, the 28mm 2.8

The 50/1.7 needs stopping down to 2.2 or 2.8 even to become tack sharp, but then it is indeed very very good. But the 50/1.7 + 28/2.8 cost is... I guess it still doesn't approach the Tamron price. That Tamron is indeed expensive. And if you'd already have the two primes, then indeed, it's a good option to simply stick with it. One can get handy with flipping lenses. The only thing I'm missing is a lens holder with a built-in cap at the bottom. Or else, cap-less, and with a rigid bottom...

the (beercan) 70-210mm

I recently acquired the BC. Right away I see it needs stopping down. So what's the point of f4 if the Sony 55-200 is at least as sharp (which I have as well)... Bokeh. It does look creamierer. I'll have to play with it more this summer.

And re international sellers vs North America sellers. Indeed too many sellers have little $ signs in their eyes, and think their lenses are holy or something. I went for the 28-135 once... Had it, hated it, sold it, good riddance. Not hard to compete with that lens at all, IMO. The 55-200 had a much higher success rate for one.

But what are those Asian lens sources? Used ones too? The only sources I know are KEH (which *sucks* for shipping to Canada), Adorama, BH Photo (both have excellent Canadian shipping options), Ebay, and then specifically ebay.com instead of ebay.ca and then asking the seller to ship to Canada some of whom think Canada has the koodies or something ;-), the local kijiji, another local online classified, craigslist (sucks where I am). That's it.

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,245Gear list
Like?
Re: Secret Handshake quircks
In reply to Ed at Ridersite, Feb 25, 2013

If you actually ever used this lens, you must have had a bad copy. Mine is tack sharp wide open throughout the range. No zoom creep what so ever. No focusing issues. Minimum focus is 1.5 meters - not good, but not what you say. Weight is 750g, not light, but not as heavy as the Ziess 24-70mm.

Mine must have been bad then. Yet there are other reports of hazing wide open elsewhere, including Kurt Munger. The lens barrel is super heavy, metal. It's not hard to imagine, that the average copy out there will extends on its own while hanging the camera down your neck or down a sling. I've walked around with it a few times, and it was so darn uncomfortable.

Focus distance is worse than 1.5 when zooming in. I have two other heavy uncomfortable lenses of the same era, the BC and BBC. My shelf is full of metal lenses 28-80 as well. 50/1.7....

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Answell
Contributing MemberPosts: 940Gear list
Like?
Re: +1
In reply to 123Mike, Feb 25, 2013

I purchased my Sony brand new from a ebay seller in South Korea (listed worldwide on ebay) for $699.. free shipping. no taxes, and got it in 1 week. You do a search for whatever you are looking for, and if it is seller from Asia, usually it is cheaper. new or used. As for sellers from the US on ebay, it is hard to believe that they do not know that Canada and the US is only separated on every border by a f.......g  bridge. They still think that we live in Igloos in some far and remote country, that they only hear about.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads