RF100-500 or EF 500mm F4

ChrisLeong · Oct 1, 2023

Hi,

A noob question from me. I have a R7 and uses it alot for shooting wakeboarding at a park. With the recent shoots that i have done, i have been renting the RF100-500 to try it out, but 98% of all the photos are taken at the 500mm end.

Having have the option of purchasing a lens for myself, i find myself in a situation where i could get a RF100-500 new at about 15% cheaper than a used EF 500mm F4. Between this 2 choices that i have right now, which would be the most clever choice. Given that i love shooting animals n nature too. I may have the need to use a 1.4x TC on it too so that could be a factor in deciding.

I have a 17-55 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 for shorter focal length needs.

Jackson Rabello · Oct 2, 2023

I Just get today my second RF 100-500mm, this lens it is amazing go get it

ChrisLeong · Oct 2, 2023

Kabalyero said:
How about an RF 100-400mm lens with TC's?

Im shooting mainly at the 500mm end with crop in post. So i believe the RF100-400 with TC is not enough

Justme · Oct 2, 2023

I've had the Canon 500 f4 II for about 10 years now. Seldom used because it is big and cumbersome and needs a tripod. I thought about selling it.

The 500 f4 II comes in handy for the right situations. Like trying to photograph a small owl in the dark or low-light. I have been using the lens for the past couple of weeks because I need as much shutter speed as I can get. Paired with a low light camera such as the R6 Mk2, allows me to get nice photos no matter how low the light is.

I plan to get the RF 100-500 as well, soon. The RF 100-500 will not do as good as the 500 f4 II shooting in low light. Sunset is at 6:40pm and I'm shooting owls after 7pm to 7:30pm. That is when the faster aperture of the f4 beats the f/7.1 of the RF 100-500.

So, you will need to determine what your priorities are. I like both the RF 100-500 for walk-around everyday lens and the EF 500 f/4 II for special low-light photography.

This photo taken tonight at ISO 25,600, 1/10s and f/4 would have been a lot more noisy if I had to use f/7.1 at 500mm.

Owl and Fall colours photo - golfpic photos at pbase.com

xx

ChrisLeong · Oct 2, 2023

Hav anyone had some photos of a sunny day, using RF100-500 with a 1.4x Tc at the longest end?

So one consideration im factoring in is, if i need to use a 1.4x TC for extra reach, the 500mm f4 would have better IQ n more light compared to the RF100-500 with 1.4x TC

Justme · Oct 2, 2023

ChrisLeong said:
Hav anyone had some photos of a sunny day, using RF100-500 with a 1.4x Tc at the longest end?

So one consideration im factoring in is, if i need to use a 1.4x TC for extra reach, the 500mm f4 would have better IQ n more light compared to the RF100-500 with 1.4x TC

The reason I'm thinking about getting the RF 100-500 is because it is way more portable than the EF 500 f4 II. Carrying it in the field will be much more enjoyable. Lugging around the 500 f4 II on a tripod is not what I call fun. When in the field, I want to go light and explore. That's my reason for getting the RF 100-500 and I know it is sharp. I have read reports that it is still sharp with a 1.4x attached.

R2D2 · Oct 2, 2023

Justme said:
ChrisLeong said:

Hav anyone had some photos of a sunny day, using RF100-500 with a 1.4x Tc at the longest end?

So one consideration im factoring in is, if i need to use a 1.4x TC for extra reach, the 500mm f4 would have better IQ n more light compared to the RF100-500 with 1.4x TC

Click to expand...

The reason I'm thinking about getting the RF 100-500 is because it is way more portable than the EF 500 f4 II. Carrying it in the field will be much more enjoyable. Lugging around the 500 f4 II on a tripod is not what I call fun. When in the field, I want to go light and explore. That's my reason for getting the RF 100-500 and I know it is sharp. I have read reports that it is still sharp with a 1.4x attached.

I was forced to go Small and Light many moons ago by my bad back. Ugh. Thus the choice of an RF 100-500 +/- 1.4x for my tele needs. Fortunately it’s extremely sharp and fast-focusing with excellent stabilization, but it doesn’t have the low light capability or the bokeh and subject separation that the big 500/4 does. Never will. (your recent splendid owl photo is testament to that).

Chris however finds himself in about the perfect circumstances to utilize this Great White, and would benefit from all its goodness methinks. Maybe you guys could trade?? :-D :-D

You and I however need to hike and climb and squeeze through the gnarliest of terrain, in all sorts of weather to reach our quarry, so the smaller lens makes a lot of sense (f you can bear the hit in IQ).

I can post some shots taken with the RF 100-500 + 1.4x for Chris tomorrow. I’m at 700mm about 90% of the time. I would suggest shooting RAW + DxO Photolab to get the most from this combo (f/10 is a bit slow). G’nite!

R2

ps. Found an owl (back at ya ;-) ), taken with this combo on the R5…

2160 px

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

Shawn1519 · Oct 3, 2023

Very good points brought up in this thread. It comes down to 2 options 1) more portability with slightly less quality, or 2) less portability and slightly better quality.

Each person has to decide which is the better solution for them.

To help with the portability issues of the 500mm F4 mk II, I have the following to help out:

1) If I need to put the lens/camera in a backpack to carry, I think the Tamrac Anvil Super 25 backpack works well. it holds the lens with teleconverter and R5 (with battery grip) nicely. A monopod straps to it nicely also.

Camera Backpacks | Backpacks for Camera Lenses | B&H (bhphotovideo.com)

2) I have found the 500mm F4 mk ii works well with a monopod vs trying to hand hold it. I use a Robus RCM-439 Carbon Fiber Monopod with a Wimberley MH-100 MonoGimbal Head. This combo works well for me. I agree that a tripod is not very mobile, and that I wont walk around with a tripod/500mm F4 combo.

3) with the camera mounted to the monopod, I have found that the method of draping the camera/lens/monopod over my shoulder for walking around works good.

Shawn

R2D2 · Oct 3, 2023

Shawn1519 said:
Very good points brought up in this thread. It comes down to 2 options 1) more portability with slightly less quality, or 2) less portability and slightly better quality.

Each person has to decide which is the better solution for them.

To help with the portability issues of the 500mm F4 mk II, I have the following to help out:

1) If I need to put the lens/camera in a backpack to carry, I think the Tamrac Anvil Super 25 backpack works well. it holds the lens with teleconverter and R5 (with battery grip) nicely. A monopod straps to it nicely also.

Camera Backpacks | Backpacks for Camera Lenses | B&H (bhphotovideo.com)

2) I have found the 500mm F4 mk ii works well with a monopod vs trying to hand hold it. I use a Robus RCM-439 Carbon Fiber Monopod with a Wimberley MH-100 MonoGimbal Head. This combo works well for me. I agree that a tripod is not very mobile, and that I wont walk around with a tripod/500mm F4 combo.

3) with the camera mounted to the monopod, I have found that the method of draping the camera/lens/monopod over my shoulder for walking around works good.

Shawn

+1 Nice tips!

R2

R2D2 · Oct 3, 2023

ChrisLeong said:
Hav anyone had some photos of a sunny day, using RF100-500 with a 1.4x Tc at the longest end?

Most of these have zero USM sharpening applied. I always save that for last in my workflow, as the amount of USM depends on the degree of cropping/scaling that is done. I don't have any people/sports shots handy (sorry), mainly because I usually have good access and prefer my RF 70-200 f/2.8 for that (great lens). So these birdies will have to suffice. :-D

Full res samples (large files). Canon RF 100-500 + 1.4x TC (wide open) on the R5. Click on "original size"...

.

.

.

100% crop

.

Varying light conditions. Hope these are useful!

R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.

Galleries by Jekyll & Hyde

www.pbase.com

Brian D3300 · Oct 3, 2023

KevinRA said:
(Some will say DXO and Adobe Denoise etc means you dont need the extra 2 stops now - for me this is not true as you can use these tools equally on even lower light 500 f/4 images.... ~2 stops is ~2 stops)

Thank you! I always shake my head when people act like applying Denoise only applies to a the slower lens and somehow brings the two lens closer together.

Chris Wolfgram · Oct 3, 2023

ChrisLeong said:
Hi,

A noob question from me. I have a R7 and uses it alot for shooting wakeboarding at a park. With the recent shoots that i have done, i have been renting the RF100-500 to try it out, but 98% of all the photos are taken at the 500mm end.

Having have the option of purchasing a lens for myself, i find myself in a situation where i could get a RF100-500 new at about 15% cheaper than a used EF 500mm F4. Between this 2 choices that i have right now, which would be the most clever choice. Given that i love shooting animals n nature too. I may have the need to use a 1.4x TC on it too so that could be a factor in deciding.

I have a 17-55 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 for shorter focal length needs.

If you were going to take a leap, and go with a big prime, why bother with a 500 ??? At least get a 600.
Your post makes me wonder if anyone is “giving away” an EF 800 F5.6 ?

ChrisLeong · Oct 3, 2023

R2D2 said:
ChrisLeong said:

Hav anyone had some photos of a sunny day, using RF100-500 with a 1.4x Tc at the longest end?

Click to expand...

Most of these have zero USM sharpening applied. I always save that for last in my workflow, as the amount of USM depends on the degree of cropping/scaling that is done. I don't have any people/sports shots handy (sorry), mainly because I usually have good access and prefer my RF 70-200 f/2.8 for that (great lens). So these birdies will have to suffice. :-D

Full res samples (large files). Canon RF 100-500 + 1.4x TC (wide open) on the R5. Click on "original size"...

.

.

.

100% crop

.

Varying light conditions. Hope these are useful!

R2

These look so darn GOOOOD!

ChrisLeong · Oct 3, 2023

Chris Wolfgram said:
ChrisLeong said:

Hi,

A noob question from me. I have a R7 and uses it alot for shooting wakeboarding at a park. With the recent shoots that i have done, i have been renting the RF100-500 to try it out, but 98% of all the photos are taken at the 500mm end.

Having have the option of purchasing a lens for myself, i find myself in a situation where i could get a RF100-500 new at about 15% cheaper than a used EF 500mm F4. Between this 2 choices that i have right now, which would be the most clever choice. Given that i love shooting animals n nature too. I may have the need to use a 1.4x TC on it too so that could be a factor in deciding.

I have a 17-55 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 for shorter focal length needs.

Click to expand...

If you were going to take a leap, and go with a big prime, why bother with a 500 ??? At least get a 600.
Your post makes me wonder if anyone is “giving away” an EF 800 F5.6 ?

Haha... if i had my way, i would have gone with a RF600 F4 and use my legs to move around mate!

But looking at some sample photos of the RF100-500 with a 1.4X TC at wide open, the IQ is not too bad and considering that my subject would normally be done in sunlight hours, it might not be too bad of a choice aferall and i get the portability. But the bokeh and IQ on the 500mm F4 even with 1.4x is another level.

R2D2 · Oct 3, 2023

ChrisLeong said:
R2D2 said:

ChrisLeong said:

Hav anyone had some photos of a sunny day, using RF100-500 with a 1.4x Tc at the longest end?

Click to expand...

Most of these have zero USM sharpening applied. I always save that for last in my workflow, as the amount of USM depends on the degree of cropping/scaling that is done. I don't have any people/sports shots handy (sorry), mainly because I usually have good access and prefer my RF 70-200 f/2.8 for that (great lens). So these birdies will have to suffice. :-D

Full res samples (large files). Canon RF 100-500 + 1.4x TC (wide open) on the R5. Click on "original size"...

Varying light conditions. Hope these are useful!

R2

Click to expand...

These look so darn GOOOOD!

Thanks. If a person desires light and portable, this is it!

R2

R2D2 · Oct 3, 2023

ChrisLeong said:
Chris Wolfgram said:

If you were going to take a leap, and go with a big prime, why bother with a 500 ??? At least get a 600.
Your post makes me wonder if anyone is “giving away” an EF 800 F5.6 ?

Click to expand...

Haha... if i had my way, i would have gone with a RF600 F4 and use my legs to move around mate!

But looking at some sample photos of the RF100-500 with a 1.4X TC at wide open, the IQ is not too bad and considering that my subject would normally be done in sunlight hours, it might not be too bad of a choice aferall and i get the portability.

True.

ChrisLeong said:
But the bokeh and IQ on the 500mm F4 even with 1.4x is another level.

But this is the lens for those that can tote it!

R2

R2D2 · Oct 3, 2023

Brian D3300 said:
KevinRA said:

(Some will say DXO and Adobe Denoise etc means you dont need the extra 2 stops now - for me this is not true as you can use these tools equally on even lower light 500 f/4 images.... ~2 stops is ~2 stops)

Click to expand...

Thank you! I always shake my head when people act like applying Denoise only applies to a the slower lens and somehow brings the two lens closer together.

They maintain their separation of course, but the latest noise reduction software will bring the slower lens/equipment into the same conversation at least! It’s a real game-changer. I couldn’t shoot my RF 100-500 + 1.4x without it!

R2

Chris Wolfgram · Oct 3, 2023

ChrisLeong said:
Chris Wolfgram said:

ChrisLeong said:

Hi,

A noob question from me. I have a R7 and uses it alot for shooting wakeboarding at a park. With the recent shoots that i have done, i have been renting the RF100-500 to try it out, but 98% of all the photos are taken at the 500mm end.

Having have the option of purchasing a lens for myself, i find myself in a situation where i could get a RF100-500 new at about 15% cheaper than a used EF 500mm F4. Between this 2 choices that i have right now, which would be the most clever choice. Given that i love shooting animals n nature too. I may have the need to use a 1.4x TC on it too so that could be a factor in deciding.

I have a 17-55 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 for shorter focal length needs.

Click to expand...

If you were going to take a leap, and go with a big prime, why bother with a 500 ??? At least get a 600.
Your post makes me wonder if anyone is “giving away” an EF 800 F5.6 ?

Click to expand...

Haha... if i had my way, i would have gone with a RF600 F4 and use my legs to move around mate!

For me it would be the RF 800 F5.6

And only $16K, what a bargain

lol

ChrisLeong said:
But looking at some sample photos of the RF100-500 with a 1.4X TC at wide open,

JMPO, but unless I was shooting larger birds more often, or BIF, I wouldn’t pay $2900 for the 100-500, then have a TC on it constantly, which not only makes the lens not fully contractable, but also slows it down as much, or more than my $1000 800 F11.

ChrisLeong said:
the IQ is not too bad

Heck, I’d say the IQ of the 100-500 is fantastic. Granted, so is the IQ from the $700 600 F11, and the $1000 800 F11.

ChrisLeong said:
and considering that my subject would normally be done in sunlight hours, it might not be too bad of a choice aferall and i get the portability. But the bokeh and IQ on the 500mm F4 even with 1.4x is another level.

Ehhhh, whether it be the 100-500, the 500F4, or the 600 or 800 F11’s, the bokeh has SO much more to do with the separation between the subject and the BG, than it does the aperture of the lens. I have a bunch of shots with totally blurred, completely creamy BG’s…. Although I don’t think that’s always necessary. In fact, if every shot in a portfolio is completely blurred, zero detail BG’s, I think it can start to be a bit boring.

R2D2 · Oct 3, 2023

Chris Wolfgram said:
ChrisLeong said:

Chris Wolfgram said:

ChrisLeong said:

Hi,

A noob question from me. I have a R7 and uses it alot for shooting wakeboarding at a park. With the recent shoots that i have done, i have been renting the RF100-500 to try it out, but 98% of all the photos are taken at the 500mm end.

Having have the option of purchasing a lens for myself, i find myself in a situation where i could get a RF100-500 new at about 15% cheaper than a used EF 500mm F4. Between this 2 choices that i have right now, which would be the most clever choice. Given that i love shooting animals n nature too. I may have the need to use a 1.4x TC on it too so that could be a factor in deciding.

I have a 17-55 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 for shorter focal length needs.

Click to expand...

If you were going to take a leap, and go with a big prime, why bother with a 500 ??? At least get a 600.
Your post makes me wonder if anyone is “giving away” an EF 800 F5.6 ?

Click to expand...

Haha... if i had my way, i would have gone with a RF600 F4 and use my legs to move around mate!

Click to expand...

For me it would be the RF 800 F5.6 And only $16K, what a bargain lol

Chris Wolfgram said:

But looking at some sample photos of the RF100-500 with a 1.4X TC at wide open,

Click to expand...

JMPO, but unless I was shooting larger birds more often, or BIF, I wouldn’t pay $2900 for the 100-500, then have a TC on it constantly, which not only makes the lens not fully contractable, but also slows it down as much, or more than my $1000 800 F11.

Chris Wolfgram said:

the IQ is not too bad

Click to expand...

Heck, I’d say the IQ of the 100-500 is fantastic. Granted, so is the IQ from the $700 600 F11, and the $1000 800 F11.

Chris Wolfgram said:

and considering that my subject would normally be done in sunlight hours, it might not be too bad of a choice aferall and i get the portability. But the bokeh and IQ on the 500mm F4 even with 1.4x is another level.

Click to expand...

Ehhhh, whether it be the 100-500, the 500F4, or the 600 or 800 F11’s, the bokeh has SO much more to do with the separation between the subject and the BG, than it does the aperture of the lens. I have a bunch of shots with totally blurred, completely creamy BG’s…. Although I don’t think that’s always necessary. In fact, if every shot in a portfolio is completely blurred, zero detail BG’s, I think it can start to be a bit boring.

The 600 and 800 f/11 lenses are certainly two other lenses the OP can be looking at (he is reach-limited like you). They are much too limiting IMHO for other types of shooting though. I need the versatility of the zoom myself.

However there really is a very large gap between an f/10 or f/11 lens and the big 500 f/4. Admittedly you might not realize that until you’ve shot with it for a while. The bokeh (and character) are simply in another league. And keep in mind that the OP does not have a lot of (compositional) options to maximize background blur (see samples from his previous threads). IMHO increasing DOF control will absolutely impart a more professional look.

R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

Chris Wolfgram · Oct 3, 2023

R2D2 said:
Chris Wolfgram said:

ChrisLeong said:

Chris Wolfgram said:

ChrisLeong said:

Hi,

A noob question from me. I have a R7 and uses it alot for shooting wakeboarding at a park. With the recent shoots that i have done, i have been renting the RF100-500 to try it out, but 98% of all the photos are taken at the 500mm end.

Having have the option of purchasing a lens for myself, i find myself in a situation where i could get a RF100-500 new at about 15% cheaper than a used EF 500mm F4. Between this 2 choices that i have right now, which would be the most clever choice. Given that i love shooting animals n nature too. I may have the need to use a 1.4x TC on it too so that could be a factor in deciding.

I have a 17-55 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 for shorter focal length needs.

Click to expand...

If you were going to take a leap, and go with a big prime, why bother with a 500 ??? At least get a 600.
Your post makes me wonder if anyone is “giving away” an EF 800 F5.6 ?

Click to expand...

Haha... if i had my way, i would have gone with a RF600 F4 and use my legs to move around mate!

Click to expand...

For me it would be the RF 800 F5.6 And only $16K, what a bargain lol

R2D2 said:

But looking at some sample photos of the RF100-500 with a 1.4X TC at wide open,

Click to expand...

JMPO, but unless I was shooting larger birds more often, or BIF, I wouldn’t pay $2900 for the 100-500, then have a TC on it constantly, which not only makes the lens not fully contractable, but also slows it down as much, or more than my $1000 800 F11.

R2D2 said:

the IQ is not too bad

Click to expand...

Heck, I’d say the IQ of the 100-500 is fantastic. Granted, so is the IQ from the $700 600 F11, and the $1000 800 F11.

R2D2 said:

and considering that my subject would normally be done in sunlight hours, it might not be too bad of a choice aferall and i get the portability. But the bokeh and IQ on the 500mm F4 even with 1.4x is another level.

Click to expand...

Ehhhh, whether it be the 100-500, the 500F4, or the 600 or 800 F11’s, the bokeh has SO much more to do with the separation between the subject and the BG, than it does the aperture of the lens. I have a bunch of shots with totally blurred, completely creamy BG’s…. Although I don’t think that’s always necessary. In fact, if every shot in a portfolio is completely blurred, zero detail BG’s, I think it can start to be a bit boring.

Click to expand...

The 600 and 800 f/11 lenses are certainly two other lenses the OP can be looking at (he is reach-limited like you). They are much too limiting IMHO for other types of shooting though.

I have often said, they are totally limited to exactly what I shoot 95+% of the time

R2D2 said:
I need the versatility of the zoom myself

I just got back from a 4500 mile photography trip. Took 12,000 shots. I think maybe 5 times I could have got some full body shots of larger birds if I could have zoomed out... But instead, I got some fantastic head shots, a couple of which actually made it to my Flicker page

R2D2 said:
However there really is a very large gap between an f/10 or f/11 lens and the big 500 f/4. Admittedly you might not realize that until you’ve shot with it for a while. The bokeh (and character) are simply in another league. And keep in mind that the OP does not have a lot of (compositional) options to maximize background blur (see samples from his previous threads). IMHO increasing DOF control will absolutely impart a more professional look.

R2

--
Every day in the field is a blessing. Nice photos, of beautiful birds and wildlife are just a bonus.

Chris Wolfgram ✝️

Explore Chris Wolfgram ✝️’s 1,110 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

No time or attention given for negativity or trolls.

ChrisLeong · Oct 3, 2023

R2D2 said:
Chris Wolfgram said:

ChrisLeong said:

Chris Wolfgram said:

ChrisLeong said:

Hi,

A noob question from me. I have a R7 and uses it alot for shooting wakeboarding at a park. With the recent shoots that i have done, i have been renting the RF100-500 to try it out, but 98% of all the photos are taken at the 500mm end.

Having have the option of purchasing a lens for myself, i find myself in a situation where i could get a RF100-500 new at about 15% cheaper than a used EF 500mm F4. Between this 2 choices that i have right now, which would be the most clever choice. Given that i love shooting animals n nature too. I may have the need to use a 1.4x TC on it too so that could be a factor in deciding.

I have a 17-55 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 for shorter focal length needs.

Click to expand...

If you were going to take a leap, and go with a big prime, why bother with a 500 ??? At least get a 600.
Your post makes me wonder if anyone is “giving away” an EF 800 F5.6 ?

Click to expand...

Haha... if i had my way, i would have gone with a RF600 F4 and use my legs to move around mate!

Click to expand...

For me it would be the RF 800 F5.6 And only $16K, what a bargain lol

R2D2 said:

But looking at some sample photos of the RF100-500 with a 1.4X TC at wide open,

Click to expand...

JMPO, but unless I was shooting larger birds more often, or BIF, I wouldn’t pay $2900 for the 100-500, then have a TC on it constantly, which not only makes the lens not fully contractable, but also slows it down as much, or more than my $1000 800 F11.

R2D2 said:

the IQ is not too bad

Click to expand...

Heck, I’d say the IQ of the 100-500 is fantastic. Granted, so is the IQ from the $700 600 F11, and the $1000 800 F11.

R2D2 said:

and considering that my subject would normally be done in sunlight hours, it might not be too bad of a choice aferall and i get the portability. But the bokeh and IQ on the 500mm F4 even with 1.4x is another level.

Click to expand...

Ehhhh, whether it be the 100-500, the 500F4, or the 600 or 800 F11’s, the bokeh has SO much more to do with the separation between the subject and the BG, than it does the aperture of the lens. I have a bunch of shots with totally blurred, completely creamy BG’s…. Although I don’t think that’s always necessary. In fact, if every shot in a portfolio is completely blurred, zero detail BG’s, I think it can start to be a bit boring.

Click to expand...

The 600 and 800 f/11 lenses are certainly two other lenses the OP can be looking at (he is reach-limited like you). They are much too limiting IMHO for other types of shooting though. I need the versatility of the zoom myself.

However there really is a very large gap between an f/10 or f/11 lens and the big 500 f/4. Admittedly you might not realize that until you’ve shot with it for a while. The bokeh (and character) are simply in another league. And keep in mind that the OP does not have a lot of (compositional) options to maximize background blur (see samples from his previous threads). IMHO increasing DOF control will absolutely impart a more professional look.

R2

Thank you for noticing my work mate.

RF100-500 or EF 500mm F4

Active member

New member

Active member

Veteran Member

Active member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Active member

Active member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Active member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts