Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Nikon Coolpix S800c Review

By dpreview staff on Feb 4, 2013 at 21:09 GMT

We've just posted our review of the Nikon Coolpix S800c, in collaboration with Jeff Keller of The Digital Camera Resource Page. The S800c was the first compact camera from a major manufacturer to openly use the Android mobile operating system when it was released last year. On one side it's a 16MP BSI-CMOS compact camera with a 10x, 25-250mm lens built in, on the other it's a 3.5" OLED touchscreen device running Android 2.3. Click the links below to go to the full review. 

6
I own it
2
I want it
0
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 79
WayneDB
By WayneDB (Feb 8, 2013)

So we get the review of this junk kit super fast...and we are all still waiting for the Coolpix p7700 review that you "previewed" 6 months ago...whats up? Is dpreview turning into a phone-cam review site sprinkled with the odd high end Digital SLR review that leaves the rest of us middle ground gasping for quality comment?

1 upvote
lensberg
By lensberg (Feb 6, 2013)

If people are considering a quality point & shoot camera they should look no further than the Canon Elph 330 HS... small and extremely pocketable... with a great 10x lens... pretty much the same level of outstanding image quality as the SX50 HS ... Which are pretty much the only 1/2.3-inch sensor cameras that give you excellent ISO 1600 - 3200 images

Forget inbuilt Android... simply wi-fi the images over to your android based phone and the world is your oyster...

0 upvotes
EDWARD ARTISTE
By EDWARD ARTISTE (Feb 6, 2013)

I just noticed that the camera has android 2.3. If there was one reason not to invest in this product that was it right there. Downright shameful & embarrassing.

What a POS product.

1 upvote
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (Feb 5, 2013)

I have hard time imaging who would want to buy this 'camera'. I guess that games will be still easier to play on a regular smartphone. Image quality is definitely NOT the reason to buy this product.

IF it could be actually used as a phone AND provided more attractive image quality (I do not expect RX100 HERE, but definitely MORE than what is being delivered), THEN there would be something to talk about ...

1 upvote
ryansholl
By ryansholl (Feb 5, 2013)

Now let's be fair, folks. If this is competing with camera phones, we need to compare it to its competition and evaluate its message-carrying abilities.

If it's got android, there are a number of free apps for voice recording. You can record your message, then either leave the camera somewhere where the recipient can find it and listen or, if they're not too far away, do a crow-hop and throw the camera to the call recipient. I've noticed lag before with my Droid X/M, it's just a little worse here. There's always the carrier pigeon route as well. Though it may be a bit heavy. OBVIOUS solution using a strand of creeper.

So, as a camera, it totally wins out, and as a phone it shouldn't do too bad except in the voice lag department.

With that considered, I think this camera is deserving of at least 68%.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

+1. It's all about context, and judging it for what it is, and not for what it is not. Nobody, I'm sure not even Nikon, claimed it would be an RX100 or X20 killer, with Nikon 1 AF performance in a phone sized casing. For the target market, and even judging it's images and form factor against some other 1/2.3" compacts, it's seems to be a decent first generation offering.

0 upvotes
adrianf2
By adrianf2 (Feb 5, 2013)

No, it's actually about why bother judging at all.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

@adrianf2

Camera snobs are awesome, they really are, but don't you think there is more than one type of reader/photographer of DPR? Maybe when DPR reviews the Leica M, some will say "Yuck. Why did DPR bother with this camera, it doesn't even AF or have Android?".

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
dholl
By dholl (Feb 5, 2013)

But that's the problem. DPR aren't reviewing the likes of Leica M.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

They've reviewed the D800, 5D III, D600, A99, et all, all fine cameras. I believe the X-E1 and 6D are on the way.

Some, like John Dooley, have previewed the Leica M, but few have actually reviewed it as of yet.

1 upvote
adrianf2
By adrianf2 (Feb 5, 2013)

Got nothing to do with 'camera snobs' marike6, just a question of priorities. But you seem rather obsessed by this topic so I'll leave you to it.

0 upvotes
Shakens
By Shakens (Feb 5, 2013)

why android 2.3 though? that's well out of date

0 upvotes
Paul_B Midlands UK
By Paul_B Midlands UK (Feb 5, 2013)

What a crock of c***, its so hard to read the whole review because I lost the will to live long before the end. Surely any potential buyer will have aborted the idea to buy this trash way before getting more than half way through conclusion. 66% is a ludicrous value on the face of it, with this value it could sound not too bad but really why would anyone buy this thing - it doesnt even look nice. For the money is abysmal value. I feel sorry for the sales guys in the stores having to lie to walk through the door customers if its a model their buyers stupidly choose to stock, or maybe the big supplier forces them to sell to keep the rights to sell the brand. like Richt2000 says, come one scrap these pointless cameras and move on to the NEX6, RX1 and worthwhile subject matter.

1 upvote
Richt2000
By Richt2000 (Feb 5, 2013)

Yawn.
Looking forward to the XPro1, X-E1, RX1, EOS M, 6D, E-PL5 reviews...

2 upvotes
KerryBE
By KerryBE (Feb 5, 2013)

My guess is no EOS-M review forthcoming. Same image capabilities as T4i. Autofocus addressed already. Too many other cameras the represent new developments.

0 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (Feb 5, 2013)

X-Pro1 review is already completed:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-pro1

Others are in process.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

Many complaining about the score from DPR should notice that other camera sites like ePhotozine and PhotograpyBlog also gave the S800c an "Above Average" rating in their reviews with assessments like "decent IQ with good color reproduction". At lower ISOs it does have decent IQ (see the review samples at Universal or SF) that's inline with other 1/2.3" sensor cameras. In fact I've seen other similar small sensor compacts with much worse JPEGs.

As far as why review this camera, it's one of the first Android cameras with connectivity and a mobile phone form factor. Whether or not enthusiasts are excited by it, as a category first, DPR did well to review it. For those who say no, should DPR also not review other similar "new concept" cameras like the Canon Powershot N, just because they might not be of interest to hard core photo enthusiasts?

2 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Feb 5, 2013)

Only because there are even worse "cameras" out there doesn't mean that this concrete Frankenstein-gimmick is bearable.
It's definitely not. Nikon is pulling legs with their customers by offering such a half cooked piece of crap.
Imagine you would shell out a few hundreds just to discover that the camera is nearly unusable and gives an extremely unsatisfying experience. You probably wouldn't be pleased.
This is a very bad piece of technology and that fact should be stated as what it is.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

@gl2k wrote "You probably won't be pleased"

Well if even I won't be pleased with it, it must really be bad, is that what you're suggesting? lol.

But how do you figure that this camera is even "nearly unusable" when the gallery images clearly show the contrary is true?

Seriously, why do people feel like they have to show off by turning up their noses at cameras that clearly aren't being targeted at them?

2 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Feb 5, 2013)

There's a blatant contradiction between the extremely poor test results and the score. 67% is above average, and this... er, camera is nowhere near such status. This is just a failed attempt from Nikon to look very up to date and modern, trying to appeal to both gadget freaks and occasional photographers who believe "the best camera is the one with you". They failed in both fields: OS is obsolete and image quality is mediocre at best.
If Nikon is trying to raise the bar and put up a fight against mobile phone cameras' momentum in order to keep point and shoots alive,they must try harder. Even the most die-hard Nikon fanboy will find this camera risible.

2 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (Feb 5, 2013)

Just don't do it. Put a generic phone OS on a camera. Just make the camera connective with our phones and tablets (which have an always on mentality anyway). A camera is for shooting. Focus on that. Want Android (or iOs)? Give us an app and Wifi or Bluetooth connectivity.

0 upvotes
Chev Chelios
By Chev Chelios (Feb 5, 2013)

How can a camera that has, according to its reviewer, "Mediocre photo quality" with photos that are "soft and noisy" and has "Terrible battery life" and has "buggy" and "outdated" software, and whose wi-fi "has very poor reception" with "occasional connection problems" score...

67%??????

How bad does a camera have to be to score an average 50%? (let me guess, probably unable to take a photo at all!)

:)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
24 upvotes
GeorgeZ
By GeorgeZ (Feb 5, 2013)

So true.
It's the same as with the ratings some years back: no camera to my recollectionm ever got anything less than average, 90% or more got at least a recommended.
Now they are handing out rewards to almost every camera they review. Not receiving one actually means crappy camera.
Maybe dpr thinks it boosts their reputation when they give away rewards like crazy (nooot), I don't know and they never give an answer.

1 upvote
ecm
By ecm (Feb 5, 2013)

A block of wood with a lens drawn with crayon would get 60% on this scale.

50%? I can't even imagine.... Perhaps a little robot that leaps out of your hands and gouges your eyes out so that you'll never take a photo again?

4 upvotes
ngollan
By ngollan (Feb 5, 2013)

I guess to score below 60%, the device would need to be from a company with a public advertising and sales block for dpreview or their parent company (last I checked that was Amazon, so we can be glad they don't just paste the better user reviews). Racial slurs printed on the case and randomly showing adult content on the display would help too. If there is a viewfinder, there could be a spike that stabs the user in the eye from time to time.

Let's be frank: "reviews" you find on the internet are used for the pictures so you can have a look at things like button layout or menu structure.

1 upvote
HBowman
By HBowman (Feb 5, 2013)

EPIC FAIL IS EPIC !!!

2 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Feb 5, 2013)

The perfect example of the dominance of the marketing dept. over engineering. A stupid toy from the makers of the great FM. Nikon, please dump this rubbish and get back to what you're good at.

2 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Feb 5, 2013)

This camera is a kiddy gimmick for an 8 year old.
The basic idea might spur interest on the tech savvy ones among us but then ... well then it should be state of the art camera with Android 4.2 and some serious photographic capabilities surpassing other similar cameras. But none of this applies. It all boils down to crap.

0 upvotes
javidog
By javidog (Feb 5, 2013)

Hey, hey! Be careful. I have an 8-year old and I would not give him this camera. I would, at least, start him with my old G9 or 11. ;)

0 upvotes
tbaker
By tbaker (Feb 5, 2013)

Should have been an F2.5-f4 lens. It would have made this camera a bit more compelling.

3 upvotes
EDWARD ARTISTE
By EDWARD ARTISTE (Feb 5, 2013)

Someone mentioned a good question, and one that ive been wondering as well- why doesn't dp reivew buy equipment to test? Ive seen mentions of you guys have to wait for samples...

...while many samples await you at the rental shop and bh/adorama.

Just a question. Love the site, but yall have to see the pitchforks being raised....

2 upvotes
ngollan
By ngollan (Feb 5, 2013)

It boils down to the simple question, "why buy what you can have for free (or at least a lot cheaper than retail)?"

With the heaps and heaps of interchangeable rubbish compacts being spewed into the market all the time, it would cost a lot of money to buy all the crap on top of testing and exposing of it properly.

0 upvotes
RAG64
By RAG64 (Feb 5, 2013)

Buying & then reselling as "almost new" doesn't have to be that expensive. I believe some other sites do it.

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Feb 5, 2013)

Professional reviewers (not only of cameras, but books, CDs, video games etc.) usually don't buy or rent the products they're going to review. They review what the manufacturer/publisher sends them. If they don't receive a copy, they don't review it.

0 upvotes
vodanh1982
By vodanh1982 (Feb 5, 2013)

I'll buy one if it can make phone calls and have 4G.

2 upvotes
jtan163
By jtan163 (Feb 5, 2013)

Amen brother!

If you want to compete with phone cameras, you gotta have a phone.

0 upvotes
vodanh1982
By vodanh1982 (Feb 5, 2013)

A zoom phone will defeat all P/S like this. They will be dead in a near future.

0 upvotes
adrianf2
By adrianf2 (Feb 5, 2013)

So what if it's the first camera of its type if it's basically an uninteresting design with serious output and responsiveness problems? When there are so many decent cameras out there crying out to be reviewed, all people are saying is that DPR seems to have its priorities wrong.

But I guess we're not allowed to criticise since this is a 'free' service. Can't quite see the logic in that one.

0 upvotes
javidog
By javidog (Feb 5, 2013)

Seriously guys. You cannot be serious on wasting an ounce of energy on reviewing such a camera. Surely there is better equipment out there for y'all to play with and write about.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

I guess you think a camera review site reviewing the first camera of this type is a waste of time.

I'm glad DPR staff is selecting what to review. That's for sure.

2 upvotes
Tahir Hashmi
By Tahir Hashmi (Feb 5, 2013)

marike6, all early reviews of this camera have given it "junk" rating. DPR could at least have deprioritised reviewing this camera over better ones. I doubt if their testing method is so unique that they might show a junk camera as a winner.

Oh, let me check the conclusion to see if they actually did this...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
EDWARD ARTISTE
By EDWARD ARTISTE (Feb 5, 2013)

Nikon coolpix series...ive never read a good review of any of them over the years, so never bothered to take them seriously. they have always lost out to canon compacts, to my knowledge.

DP staff, you guys must have know this was a stinker. You could saved this work for cnet....they need the help right now. Meaning yall can keep to cameras and gear the site members care about.

I ownt repeat the same review complaints, but personally i still cant find any good reason that so much work was put into this. Ah well.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

@Tahir Hashmi Actually none of the early reviews claimed this camera was "junk", in fact, both ePhotozone and PhotographyBlog rated it "Above Average".

And even though it's not a camera I would ever buy, I think it's amusing to read all the angry comments about how it's not an RX1, NEX6 or S100. No kidding. It's not even comparable to an enthusiast compact, but people are talking like DPR and Nikon don't know that enthusiasts are NOT the target market for this camera. And it's not like ALL other 1/2.3" sensors compacts have the IQ of a D800 and the AF of a D4. There are hundreds of 1/2.3" compact with similar IQ to this camera.

0 upvotes
dpLarry
By dpLarry (Feb 5, 2013)

Make it 6 mega pixels and it's a better camera.

My previous Nikon D50 has 6 mega pixels and it's enough.

0 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Feb 5, 2013)

Probably looks great on your 15" tube.

0 upvotes
Tee1up
By Tee1up (Feb 5, 2013)

They need to put a poison sticker on this camera. Poor picture quality especially indoors so it is able to compete with iphone/galaxy. WiFi so you can sit in front of your computer and download images wirelessly in 4 times the time you could if you removed a card. Gotta stop there. Too painful.

5 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Feb 5, 2013)

Nice work Nikon. A stillborn camera. Hardly a camera at all. Just a gadget and way overpriced at that.

DPR, will this be the sole review in Feb like the Canon P&S super zoom was the sole review in Jan? Why are the reviews so sparse on dpREVIEW?

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
morepix
By morepix (Feb 5, 2013)

Amen, bro. I've been a frequent flyer with DPR for ten years. And I've found the low S/N ratio of the forums offset by the high S/N ratio of the reviews. But now that real reviews seem to be getting terribly sparse, I find my interest in the site going down the drain. And I do genuinely regret that.

1 upvote
Airless
By Airless (Feb 5, 2013)

This camera is one of the worst pieces of junk the cameraverse has ever seen.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

I didn't read the whole review, but from the conclusions and looking at the JPEG comparisons, I actually thought the reviewer was a bit hard on the camera. I think that in the context of what the camera represents, a better smartphone, IQ is fine, and honestly, except for the Canon, IQ is as good or better than the other 3 test cameras.

Of course there is heavy NR and if you pixel peep images you will surely find flaws, but few owners of such a camera are going to be photographing test scenes and zooming to 100%. Like most of the lower tier 1/2.3" sensor cameras, it seems to produce bright, well exposed snaps, no more, no less.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 5, 2013)

You've touched on the problem there, I'm afraid. It's in the bright, high-contrast conditions of our test scene that the S800c does OK. Out in the real world its IQ is just so-so.

7 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Feb 5, 2013)

No, in the lower key parts of the image, you can see how bad the camera does. You can hardly read anything on the globe. Shadows are smeared.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

I hear you Barney, but actually I went to see the samples expecting a train wreck based on your comments, and most of the low ISO images are bright, well exposed, with good sharpness. And the camera seems to have a good JPEG engine which not all cameras in this class have.

0 upvotes
joe6pack
By joe6pack (Feb 4, 2013)

What I really like to see from a "smart camera" is it allows apps to maximize the camera's "smart" potential. I don't care what shooting modes the camera offer. I like to see a standardized architecture that any app can make use of. A separation between camera software and hardware. For example, a super camera app that can take HDR, face detection, live histogram, etc.

I also like to see the camera manufacturers expose the RAW image to allow better pp.

2 upvotes
Lan
By Lan (Feb 4, 2013)

Jeff: Welcome to DPReview; I look forward to your contributions increasing when you join the team full time!

Another good review; but I'd like to see more about the camera from a programmer's perspective? This is what makes the camera (nearly) unique afterall!

Android means we can now program the camera, but I want to know how much we can change? How much of the camera functionality is exposed to developers?

For example: Can we access the RAW image from an app, and perform our own demosaicing, or is the image only ever presented to Android as a fully baked JPEG?

Can we program the lens focus via an app?

Now, I'll admit this is niche information, and maybe it's a better fit to a different site, but as a camera geek I want to know. I know there are many camera geeks here, so maybe they want to know too?

Any chance of a more in depth dig into the software/firmware guts of the beasty?

4 upvotes
dylanbarnhart
By dylanbarnhart (Feb 5, 2013)

The brief answer is that Nikon did not provide any software libraries beyond what's in the Android SDK.

http://developer.android.com/reference/android/hardware/Camera.html

That bad news, because there are huge limitations with the Android SDK: can't take pictures larger than 8MP, can't control the optical zoom, etc.

0 upvotes
_sem_
By _sem_ (Feb 4, 2013)

I might find the thing interesting if it were a cameraphone...

0 upvotes
dsm6
By dsm6 (Feb 4, 2013)

Wow. That is an impressive list of Cons.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 4, 2013)

Yes, but I found it odd that the Pros praised the OLED LCD and the cons criticized the OLED LCD. That LCDs OLED or otherwise can be difficult to see in certain light can be said is a comment that can be made about ALL LCDS. So I thought that "con" was a nitpick.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Feb 4, 2013)

Yeah, that is the review everybody waited for...

3 upvotes
BingoCharlie
By BingoCharlie (Feb 4, 2013)

So glad we got this review. Forget the NEX-6, GH3, XE-1, and 6D. A review of the Coolpix S800c is what DPR users have been clamoring for.

17 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Feb 4, 2013)

It is something unique.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 4, 2013)

It makes me glad that you're glad.

16 upvotes
dholl
By dholl (Feb 4, 2013)

The 6D was first previewed 6 months ago. It is one of the most significant cameras of the last few years.

We're still waiting for the review.

Not complaining, just reflecting what many in the community are thinking.

4 upvotes
io_bg
By io_bg (Feb 4, 2013)

don't forget the D4

4 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 4, 2013)

The 6D was announced four months ago, not six, and took a loooooooooooong long time to become available after its announcement. Very frustrating and we share your annoyance. We were finally sent a production-quality camera over New Year, and the review is nearly done.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
14 upvotes
sigala1
By sigala1 (Feb 4, 2013)

This review doesn't answer any of the important questions.

How well does the Netflix streaming app work?

How much batter life for listening to MP3s?

Does it even make phone calls?

2 upvotes
GeorgeZ
By GeorgeZ (Feb 4, 2013)

Barney, it seems from customer reviews that your parent amazon had them in late October, why is it not possible that they give you one as soon as they get one? That was one of the advantages Phil said made the amazon deal so good for readers.

3 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Feb 4, 2013)

Dear DPreview,

When several people complain about lack of content..take it as feedback. You might have very valid reasons for this but bashing your "customers" on your own message board hardly remedies those issues. I personally don't blame you, its annoying to hear the same whining every time content is posted. Most of the time I side with dpreview..but this time I will side with the whiner just for a change.

7 upvotes
dholl
By dholl (Feb 4, 2013)

Like GeorgeZ says, can we have some feedback why dpreview have the hardest time getting hold of cameras? Even amateur review sites get complimentary review copies...

1 upvote
adrianf2
By adrianf2 (Feb 4, 2013)

Don't forget the G5? It was named consumer compact camera of the year by a UK camera mag, but seems forgotten by DPR.

Take it as constructive feedback, not whining. I come to this site for reviews of cameras I'm interested in (such as the G5), and they seem so far and few between it's hardly worth bothering.

5 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 4, 2013)

I guess you'll have to cancel your paid subscription. What a minute, you don't have one.

1 upvote
dholl
By dholl (Feb 4, 2013)

marike6, that argument is so old it's died of boredom.

3 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Feb 4, 2013)

Sorry guys, I was in a meeting for a bit and missed some more recent comments - so - George Z asks why customer reviews for the 6D started appearing back in October. All I know is that the cameras didn't start shipping until late December. Maybe people were reviewing on the basis of pre-orders.

Also, @ Mssimo - I do take this criticism as feedback. Lots of feedback. I am drowning in a warm lake of feedback. I'm having feedback sprayed all over me, and I really do listen, and I really do share the frustration, believe me. There are good reasons why we can't review everything as quickly as we'd like to (and this has always been the case) but my team and I are committed to doing more, and faster. Full reviews do take a long time, and big years for new products (like Q3 and Q4 of 2012) will always stretch our resources, but we need to find better strategies to deal with this.

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Feb 4, 2013)

@Barney

I guess you can also look at it from the angle that people really like the perspective that dpreview gives and they want more of it. Thanks for the reply by the way and hope we get more of those reviews ;)

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 5, 2013)

@dholl That argument is as true now as the first time it was mentioned.

Why do people feel they are owed reviews by DPR? Obviously if they were ready they'd be published. But to browbeat the staff is just tacky. No offense.

0 upvotes
electrophoto
By electrophoto (Feb 5, 2013)

@marike6
your "logic" is entirely flawed - it's simple: DPREVIEW Generates MONEY - this is a BUSINESS - and the money comes from the visitors (by clicking on ads and stuff) - so visitors = customers.
Customers have imho a legitimate reason to complain when the product quality goes "down" (subjective or not).

@Barney Britton
I can only assume how much work goes into a full review - and some content is better than no content... but there's the thing:
There's a TON of products that has been in "PREVIEW" state for far too long... other, smaller, review outfits have long since delivered final reviews on most of those products.
And when then a VERY LOW END product such as this CoolPix gets the attention of a full-review I understand why some of your customers ("visitors") - myself included - complain.
Especially the miraculous 67% rating...
Well then again, I think being owned by amazon makes the individual "customer feedback" not that important anymore.

2 upvotes
Richt2000
By Richt2000 (Feb 5, 2013)

XPro1 is nearly a year old.
Dpreview is great as a news site, and some of the forums are ok, but lets face it, it only exists to sell cameras from amazon. I'd bet the DPR team are told which cameras to review based on predicted profit figures from amazon.

Call me synical, but it was aimed at a different audience when it was owned by Phil...

0 upvotes
vodanh1982
By vodanh1982 (Feb 5, 2013)

@electrophoto : visitors are customers of DPR's customers. Just like Facebook, users are not direct customers.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 79