Nikon D200 competitor?

iBuzz · Jul 18, 2006

ohyva said:
iBuzz said:

dylanbarnhart said:

For some photography needs, the D200 can outperform the 350D and
the 30D. But I wouldn't trade my 350D for the D200, even if they
are the same price. Why not? Because the D200 sensor is noisy.
In bright sunlight, it's not important, but once you move in doors,
suddenly those ISO grain starts to bother the eyes. I then would
be forced to use flash to give it more light, but then flash ruins
the "mood" of the picture.

Click to expand...

Nikon have the best flash system and its easy to use compared to
the Canon one. If you use an external flash and you use it
correctly, you will obtain amazing pictures without ruins the mood;
i didn't believe it before buying the SB-600!

Click to expand...

And can you provide us a good comparison test where this betterness
of the flash is shown. And I'm not talking here the w-less flash
system Nikon has but in D200.

If you read my quote I talk about a the nikon flash "system"; a system is a set of things working together (external flash, camera and lens). The beauty of the Nikon flash system is that you don't need to worry about it, it just work! The D200 can control external flash and its easy to set up.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&thread=19058530&page=1

If you want to ruins the mood you can use your internal flash; but I think all good photographer already know that.

ohyva said:
ohyva said:

ohyva said:

The 18-200 VR is optically pathetic. Buy it only if your priority
is convenience rather than performance. VR is useless in the wider
half of that focal range anyways. I mean the idea is not even new.
A Minolta D5 (with sensor based VR) and the Tamron 18-200 will give
you what the Nikon 18-200 VR offers, for a much cheaper price.

Click to expand...

The Nikon 18-200 is a way better than the Tamron 18-200 or the
Canon kit lens; the quality is similar to the Nikon 18-70.

Click to expand...

OK, if this is true, we can stop to respect the 17-70 as being a
quality lens.

If you want to read review about a good vacation lens :
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/250/cat/6
http://www.bythom.com/18200lens.htm

If you want to see some pictures of a pathetic lens go there :

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/NikonD50vsD70SvsXT_images.shtml

ohyva said:
ohyva said:

The Canon 18-200 is very pathetic because it doesn't exist... ;-)

ohyva said:

The Nikon line lacks many professional lenses that Canon has to
offer. It's harder to buy third-party lenses and used lenses for
Nikon also.

Click to expand...

MMMmm! Maybe on Mars, but on earth you have a very big market for
Nikon used lense or third-party lense; and you can use old MF lense
on digital body. Canon lack some good professional Wideangle like
a true 180 deg. Fisheye for Digital.

Click to expand...

I agree on this. All our local shops have usually plenty of 2nd
hand Nikon lenses to offer, but very few Canon lenses. And those
few Canon lenses in in reasonable shape goes very fast. Just seem
like the used Nikon gear is the on the selves to stay - no much
market ???

ohyva said:

ohyva said:

All D200 users will start to feel really aweful once the Sony A100
comes out. They both use the same sensor, but the Sony has image
stabilization, anti-dust feature, and a cheaper price tag.

Click to expand...

Its not the same sensor (the Nikon one is faster and have lower
noise)

Click to expand...

Really??? I can accept the Sony HW may be slower, but in no way
Sony would trake in their 1st dSLR camera sensors worse than they
sell to Nikon. Mayby Sony does not put so heavy NR in their camera
either but want to deliver the users to the details.

The D200 sensor is designed in part by Nikon; the four-channel trick was designed by Nikon.

Canon make better P&S than Sony and they put Sony sensor in it!

ohyva said:
ohyva said:

and the anti-dust feature is not good (see review on
cameralabs.com). Canon doesn't have anti-dust and image
stabilization in the body; is the Canon camera are bad because
they don't have these feature?

Click to expand...

Lanidrac · Jul 18, 2006

Judderman said:
If I could start again, and had no canon equipment, I think I'd
probably go with a D200 - just seems like a better choice. I'd miss
white lenses though

No seriously, I'd like to hear people's comments on this. I'm still
a 350D owner, but I know there'll come a day when I'll want to get
a more professional feeling camera, something I know won't die in
50,000 pictures time.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

...you'd really own a 350XT or even a 300D and learn the ropes!!!
Stupid nonsense, Judderman. Didn't need a D200 to take this pic...

Lani.

jdoo · Jul 18, 2006

Uhm... same specs? First - I am a huge Canon fan, however...

5D? I said for the same price point. 5D = twice that of the D200

20D? Spec speaking . . it gets clobbered by the D200 http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond200/page25.asp

30D? Phil's words: "The primary competition coming from Nikon's excellent D200, a camera which in many ways betters the EOS 30D, user interface, features and flexibility are all a step up"

I've held a 30D and it was a great camera, and it will probably be my next upgrade - unless Canon delivers something better in the interim.

People need to be a bit less puckered up about Canon's competition and appreciate the fact that we, the consumer are the winners when there is formidable competition. It's all good.
--
Joe

Old Acct: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/postersprofile.asp?poster=hjigihivhdif

Greg Terzian · Jul 18, 2006

Amazing. The interesting thing is, I have a D70, D200, 350D, and a 20D. They all produce great results with VERY little difference between them.

D200 'noise' is not any worse than the others.

Judderman said:
Yeah the sony camera looks pretty decent - will have to wait for
the in depth review from Phil!

Why is the D200 and 18-200 bad?

Still do you not think canon should have a camera that matches the
D200? Not one that nearly matches it. Nearly matching isn't good
enough for me. It has to be as good or better.

5D is just too expensive, I wouldn't consider it a competitor with
the D200. Not sure what you guys think...

--
http://www.screamandfly.com/home

Ubilam · Jul 18, 2006

Greg Terzian said:
Amazing. The interesting thing is, I have a D70, D200, 350D, and a
20D. They all produce great results with VERY little difference
between them.

D200 'noise' is not any worse than the others.

==========

Which camera do you use most of the time from yer major arsenal?

Must be something keeping track of all the different glass too?
Nikon and Canon and others to fit wherever on the specific bodies????

Thanks for any details.

Ubi.

Judderman · Jul 19, 2006

Lanidrac said:
...you'd really own a 350XT or even a 300D and learn the ropes!!!
Stupid nonsense, Judderman. Didn't need a D200 to take this pic...

Lanidrac said:
Lani.

Guys, I'm well aware you do not need a D200 to take such a picture. I know the 350D delivers excellent pictures, you're totally missing my point. What's wrong with wanting better quality equipment? Anyhoo I've already covered my response which I think I makes sense. Cheers for your comments though.

shamhead · Jul 19, 2006

Hello everyone,
Im the friend the original poster Judderman refers to in his post.
Yes I did indeed sell my 350D (+ a couple of really nice lenses) to buy a D200.

I wanted a more professional feeling camera than the 350D NOT (and as Judderman said) to make me suddenly take better pictures but simply for better build quality and the more advanced options this camera opens up for me. At the end of the day, after arguing over specs and noise etc for me it really boiled down to feel, the quality construction of the D200 blows me away, it just makes me WANT to constantly take photos, and feels more enjoyable when doing so.

It was a choice between the 30D and the D200, and unlike a lot of people here I don't have a almost fanatical loyality to any particular camera manufactuer so I was easy with the switch. (Im sure if I had alot more canon lenses it would be a harder choice)

Anyway, the NIkon 18-200mm VR swung it for me, I'm a lazy guy and weighing up between the convience of one lens on the camera for 90% of the time and image quality which, while not be up there with other lenses, is certainly good enough for an amateur like me.

Happy snapping people!

--
http://www.shamhead.com

ohyva · Jul 19, 2006

iBuzz said:
ohyva said:

iBuzz said:

dylanbarnhart said:

For some photography needs, the D200 can outperform the 350D and
the 30D. But I wouldn't trade my 350D for the D200, even if they
are the same price. Why not? Because the D200 sensor is noisy.
In bright sunlight, it's not important, but once you move in doors,
suddenly those ISO grain starts to bother the eyes. I then would
be forced to use flash to give it more light, but then flash ruins
the "mood" of the picture.

Click to expand...

Nikon have the best flash system and its easy to use compared to
the Canon one. If you use an external flash and you use it
correctly, you will obtain amazing pictures without ruins the mood;
i didn't believe it before buying the SB-600!

Click to expand...

And can you provide us a good comparison test where this betterness
of the flash is shown. And I'm not talking here the w-less flash
system Nikon has but in D200.

Click to expand...

If you read my quote I talk about a the nikon flash "system"; a
system is a set of things working together (external flash, camera
and lens). The beauty of the Nikon flash system is that you don't
need to worry about it, it just work!

And what's the difference to Canon E-TTL2 system ???

iBuzz said:
The D200 can control external flash and its easy to set up.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&thread=19058530&page=1

or http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=14468340

I guess many this sort of posts / threads can be found. But the general consensus seem to be the Canon and Nikon flash technologies are about par, but admitted the Nikon w-less flash control integration in consumer bodies is a clear advantage.

iBuzz said:
If you want to ruins the mood you can use your internal flash; but
I think all good photographer already know that.

iBuzz said:

iBuzz said:

iBuzz said:

The 18-200 VR is optically pathetic. Buy it only if your priority
is convenience rather than performance. VR is useless in the wider
half of that focal range anyways. I mean the idea is not even new.
A Minolta D5 (with sensor based VR) and the Tamron 18-200 will give
you what the Nikon 18-200 VR offers, for a much cheaper price.

Click to expand...

The Nikon 18-200 is a way better than the Tamron 18-200 or the
Canon kit lens; the quality is similar to the Nikon 18-70.

Click to expand...

OK, if this is true, we can stop to respect the 17-70 as being a
quality lens.

Click to expand...

If you want to read review about a good vacation lens :
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/250/cat/6
http://www.bythom.com/18200lens.htm

If you want to see some pictures of a pathetic lens go there :

http://www.digitalreview.ca/cams/NikonD50vsD70SvsXT_images.shtml

No I want to own and use good lenses. Mediocre consumer grade "vacation lenses" are not is any big interest.

iBuzz said:
iBuzz said:

iBuzz said:

The Canon 18-200 is very pathetic because it doesn't exist... ;-)

iBuzz said:

The Nikon line lacks many professional lenses that Canon has to
offer. It's harder to buy third-party lenses and used lenses for
Nikon also.

Click to expand...

MMMmm! Maybe on Mars, but on earth you have a very big market for
Nikon used lense or third-party lense; and you can use old MF lense
on digital body. Canon lack some good professional Wideangle like
a true 180 deg. Fisheye for Digital.

Click to expand...

I agree on this. All our local shops have usually plenty of 2nd
hand Nikon lenses to offer, but very few Canon lenses. And those
few Canon lenses in in reasonable shape goes very fast. Just seem
like the used Nikon gear is the on the selves to stay - no much
market ???

iBuzz said:

iBuzz said:

All D200 users will start to feel really aweful once the Sony A100
comes out. They both use the same sensor, but the Sony has image
stabilization, anti-dust feature, and a cheaper price tag.

Click to expand...

Its not the same sensor (the Nikon one is faster and have lower
noise)

Click to expand...

Really??? I can accept the Sony HW may be slower, but in no way
Sony would trake in their 1st dSLR camera sensors worse than they
sell to Nikon. Mayby Sony does not put so heavy NR in their camera
either but want to deliver the users to the details.

Click to expand...

The D200 sensor is designed in part by Nikon; the four-channel
trick was designed by Nikon.

And this Nikon IPR is documented where ?

The 4 or more channel paralel data readout ain't actually any new or novel technology in image sensors. E.g. Canon 20D sensor has it http://www.linear-systems.com/products/info/eos20d.htm

iBuzz said:
Canon make better P&S than Sony and they put Sony sensor in it!

So ???

Seems Canon is not interested to put their own resources to average quality sensor development, but want to concentrate on the top quality dSLR sensors - with IMHO very good results.

iBuzz said:
iBuzz said:

iBuzz said:

and the anti-dust feature is not good (see review on
cameralabs.com). Canon doesn't have anti-dust and image
stabilization in the body; is the Canon camera are bad because
they don't have these feature?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

ohyva · Jul 19, 2006

Caoedhen said:
ohyva said:

Caoedhen said:

You really have no idea what you are talking about...

Click to expand...

Is that really so ...

Click to expand...

Wasn't replying to you... You point out that the cameras are, for
most purposes, very comparable. I absolutely agree. Cameras is
cameras, they all take pictures.

I was replying to dylanbarnhart, who has taken on the role of Nikon
basher/Canon fanatic in this thread.

OK.

In English you meaning you all or you meaning you as an individual sometimes confuses me as in my native language we have different words for those.

Caoedhen said:
--
Crime Scene Photography

ohyva · Jul 19, 2006

So you have cycled from D70 via 350D to D200.

Why did you move from D70 to 350D ?

shamhead said:
Hello everyone,
Im the friend the original poster Judderman refers to in his post.
Yes I did indeed sell my 350D (+ a couple of really nice lenses) to
buy a D200.

I wanted a more professional feeling camera than the 350D NOT (and
as Judderman said) to make me suddenly take better pictures but
simply for better build quality and the more advanced options this
camera opens up for me. At the end of the day, after arguing over
specs and noise etc for me it really boiled down to feel, the
quality construction of the D200 blows me away, it just makes me
WANT to constantly take photos, and feels more enjoyable when doing
so.

It was a choice between the 30D and the D200, and unlike a lot of
people here I don't have a almost fanatical loyality to any
particular camera manufactuer so I was easy with the switch. (Im
sure if I had alot more canon lenses it would be a harder choice)

Anyway, the NIkon 18-200mm VR swung it for me, I'm a lazy guy and
weighing up between the convience of one lens on the camera for 90%
of the time and image quality which, while not be up there with
other lenses, is certainly good enough for an amateur like me.

Happy snapping people!

--
http://www.shamhead.com

David Martin · Jul 19, 2006

If it feels right to you and you have not got great need for the better high ISO abilities of the 30D, and the 18-200 gives you enough quality, then you have certainly made a good move - happy shooting.

The comments I disagree with are those which say that the 30D is a poor camera or lags the D200, and Canon should 'compete'

They compete just fine with a camera which is cheaper enough to enable you to get a decent lens and still pay the same as the D200, especially considering you have to pay extra for the Nikon software.
You also get the better camera for low-light shooting.

Some of the touches on the D200 are very nice though, and certainly many seem to find it a pleasure to use.

The 30D competes just fine though - they are two different ranges of cameras, and it is as daft to expect Canon to make an exacrt match for the D200 as it would be to expect Nikon to produce an exact match for the 30D.
Neither is going to happen.

shamhead said:
Hello everyone,
Im the friend the original poster Judderman refers to in his post.
Yes I did indeed sell my 350D (+ a couple of really nice lenses) to
buy a D200.

I wanted a more professional feeling camera than the 350D NOT (and
as Judderman said) to make me suddenly take better pictures but
simply for better build quality and the more advanced options this
camera opens up for me. At the end of the day, after arguing over
specs and noise etc for me it really boiled down to feel, the
quality construction of the D200 blows me away, it just makes me
WANT to constantly take photos, and feels more enjoyable when doing
so.

It was a choice between the 30D and the D200, and unlike a lot of
people here I don't have a almost fanatical loyality to any
particular camera manufactuer so I was easy with the switch. (Im
sure if I had alot more canon lenses it would be a harder choice)

Anyway, the NIkon 18-200mm VR swung it for me, I'm a lazy guy and
weighing up between the convience of one lens on the camera for 90%
of the time and image quality which, while not be up there with
other lenses, is certainly good enough for an amateur like me.

Happy snapping people!

--
http://www.shamhead.com

--
Regards,
DaveMart

'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment

papparazzi · Jul 19, 2006

dimar said:
Who cares about Sigma? Canon non L zooms have so unstable quality
that Canon users have to buy third party lenses. But it's a lottery
too.

85/1.2 not better for low light then 70-200/2.8 IS/VR. It has
better bokeh, that's the advantage. But professionals use mainly
16-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 IS.

you don't know anything, have you ever used an L wide angle lens, i assume not, btw i work with both systems so you are out of luck
--
http://iciclelanding.com/jdf

iBuzz · Jul 19, 2006

ohyva said:
No I want to own and use good lenses. Mediocre consumer grade
"vacation lenses" are not is any big interest.

The 18-200 is not a mediocre lens! All review of 18-200 agree with this. Its not a Nikon 17-55 2.8 or 70-200vr, I agree, but you must compare apple with apple. If you like to carry your big 2.8 zoom with you on vacation its your choice, but the majority of people want the best lens, the most used range in a small package (its why the market is so big for the 18-200 VR; its why Nikon sell these lens like hotcake).

ohyva said:
The 4 or more channel paralel data readout ain't actually any new
or novel technology in image sensors. E.g. Canon 20D sensor has it
http://www.linear-systems.com/products/info/eos20d.htm

The hight speed 4-channel output allows the Nikon D200 to adopt the advanced image-processing engine similar to the D2x. The difference with D200, is they use a 4-channel output for a CCD (Canon and the D2x use CMOS). For the moment only Nikon use this sensor, no other CCD based DSLR use a 4-channel output (including the Sony A100 who use a traditional 2-channel CCD).

ohyva said:
ohyva said:

Canon make better P&S than Sony and they put Sony sensor in it!

Click to expand...

So ???

Seems Canon is not interested to put their own resources to average
quality sensor development, but want to concentrate on the top
quality dSLR sensors - with IMHO very good results.

If National Geographic listen to you, they could refuse all pictures taken with Nikon DSRL because only Canon use a top quality sensor in their SLR! Because all pictures taken with other camera than Canon seem to be average, because of these crappy sensor made by other makers.

papparazzi · Jul 19, 2006

Judderman said:
Lanidrac said:

...you'd really own a 350XT or even a 300D and learn the ropes!!!
Stupid nonsense, Judderman. Didn't need a D200 to take this pic...

Click to expand...

Judderman said:

Lani.

Click to expand...

Guys, I'm well aware you do not need a D200 to take such a picture.
I know the 350D delivers excellent pictures, you're totally missing
my point. What's wrong with wanting better quality equipment?
Anyhoo I've already covered my response which I think I makes
sense. Cheers for your comments though.

Having worked with both, nikon are only good from the outside, get it? In the inside canon's are better, this is something you will see in time, as for Lenses, check out photozone to see nikon's mtf's a real joke on the corners compared to canon's...better in the sensor...better in the glass..what do you want more??'

Forget the bodies, i'll bet canon will have something way better than the d200, history makes me right on this

--
http://iciclelanding.com/jdf

ohyva · Jul 19, 2006

iBuzz said:
iBuzz said:

No I want to own and use good lenses. Mediocre consumer grade
"vacation lenses" are not is any big interest.

Click to expand...

The 18-200 is not a mediocre lens! All review of 18-200 agree with
this.

Whatever ...

If you think your D200 will deliver its best with this lens, then go on. But I would not use this combination except for perhaps some holiday trip, and there I think the system is somewhat too heavy (compared to my "travel kit" 350D + 17-85 IS).

iBuzz said:
Its not a Nikon 17-55 2.8 or 70-200vr, I agree, but you must
compare apple with apple. If you like to carry your big 2.8 zoom
with you on vacation its your choice, but the majority of people
want the best lens, the most used range in a small package (its why
the market is so big for the 18-200 VR; its why Nikon sell these
lens like hotcake).

iBuzz said:

The 4 or more channel paralel data readout ain't actually any new
or novel technology in image sensors. E.g. Canon 20D sensor has it
http://www.linear-systems.com/products/info/eos20d.htm

Click to expand...

The hight speed 4-channel output allows the Nikon D200 to adopt
the advanced image-processing engine similar to the D2x. The
difference with D200, is they use a 4-channel output for a CCD
(Canon and the D2x use CMOS). For the moment only Nikon use this
sensor, no other CCD based DSLR use a 4-channel output (including
the Sony A100 who use a traditional 2-channel CCD).

Care provide me the link to information where this detailed info of A100 internal electronics is given.

And even if Sony uses two channel output this does not say the sensor is different. Digital image sensors are usually designed to be quite flexible in their I/O, and I'm quite sure Sony has designed the sensor to fit their new camera from the beggining.

iBuzz said:
iBuzz said:

iBuzz said:

Canon make better P&S than Sony and they put Sony sensor in it!

Click to expand...

So ???

Seems Canon is not interested to put their own resources to average
quality sensor development, but want to concentrate on the top
quality dSLR sensors - with IMHO very good results.

Click to expand...

If National Geographic listen to you, they could refuse all
pictures taken with Nikon DSRL because only Canon use a top quality
sensor in their SLR! Because all pictures taken with other camera
than Canon seem to be average, because of these crappy sensor made
by other makers.

I do not think I have ever said the Sony sensors are crappy.
In most respects they are just good.
The only real "shortcoming" is their ability to deliver details at high ISO.

DuxX · Jul 19, 2006

Judderman said:
Hi All,

First off I'm a canon 350d owner, otherwise I wouldn't be posting
in this forum! Anyway, my question regards a direct competitor to
the D200 camera.

For now direct competitor is 30D and I think that 30D can offer more than D200 for better price. How? Well, here is link to my answer on similar question 2 days ago.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=19231595

At the end. After all facts we can't forget about personal preference. So, if you have desire to go with Nikon then go. I'm sure you'll be happy. If you chose to stay with Canon, I believe... you'll be VERY happy :-]

Best regards,
--
Dusko Jovic / DuxX /

Hellashot · Jul 19, 2006

Even though D200 has 2 more MP (only a 25% gain) Nikon still has 1 stop noisier images above iso400 than the 30D which has same image quality as the 20D. Which means Nikon's new camera can't beat the low noise of a camera that was out for 1 year when the D200 came out.

Nikon has bells and whistles (really more like buttons and switches) Canon has more settings in menus and ontop of the camera, but it's a moot point once you use a Canon and get comfortable with it.

For me and many, image quality is what is most important and Canon has and has had a leg up on Nikon for years now.

Steven Noyes · Jul 19, 2006

The built in AS would be nice. So would the 135mm f1.8

Steven

--
---
Spring 2006:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/images_spring_2006

DNAmaster · Jul 19, 2006

I use my laptop to make a living. I don't care if it is made of plastic or metal as long as it is durable enough. I care very much that it is small and light. Since I make a living from it, if it breaks, I'll immediately get another laptop - later model with more features.

I am not physically attached to my laptop. I don't love it. I don't care if other people use another brand. As soon as something better comes out, which would allow me to make more money, the current laptop is history. I will even switch brands. In the last 10 years, I switched brands 4 times.

I am a pro with my laptop. But I don't go out and buy something tougher than I need. That is just extra weight. I buy the most economical computer that can satisfy the job requirement.

I would think people would feel the same way about their cameras. I certainly do.

Vlad K · Jul 19, 2006

There is no need to build a direct D200 competitor at the moment for Canon.
Yes, D200 is sucessful, but:

Canon is DSLR market leader, and instead of replying, they make their own clear way to success, and press others to respond.
If Canon had built analog of D200, it would compete first of all with 5D and D30 sales, not with D200. Especially it would shrink the sales of 5D, IMHO. If the camera does not bring enough new customers to justify the development and the delivery cost, there is no sense in selling it. Most of those who would buy a D200 analog from Canon, will buy 5D or D30 instead of going with D200. I do not think that many of those who purchase D200 would buy the alternative from Canon if it was available. Most D200 buyers are already loyal Nikon customers, IMHO.
Canon have just released D30 which delivers the same IQ, not to say more, for the half price of D200. It lacks some really niced bells and whistles of D200, but if you really need them (may be, 5% of all DSLR users ever use it), Canon has 5D which outperforms D200 in every single aspect (except weight and built-in flash). If you believe that the price of 5D puts D200 to advantage, look at success of 350D. This is Canon's entry level camera which sells for almost 1,5 the price of competitors. And it easily outsells them.

The real threat to Canon dominance is not the D200, but Sony entering the entry level market. Prices and profit margin there will go down shortly. And the entry level market is the key to success, because the user loyalty to a trademark plays a big role here, especially if you keep in mind incompatibility of expensive DSLR 'acessories' (lenses, flashes) which, I am sure, bring more profit to DSLR vendors than bodies itself.
--
Vlad

Nikon D200 competitor?

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Ubilam

Guest

Member

Active member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

David Martin

Guest

papparazzi

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

papparazzi

Guest

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts