Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > Lomography

Lomography Dedicated to discuss all Lomography Products

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 02-17-2016   #321
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
 
coelacanth's Avatar
 
coelacanth is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,431
I am not into lomography/toy camera type of stuff at all, but this lens has a very unique combination of things that I think resonates well with some (or many) people on RFF including myself. Sonnar design LTM compatible (of course that means it can be mounted on M and virtually all mirrorless systems out there) 0.7m min focus compact fast lens made of brass with modern coating.

It's easy to dismiss it as a overpriced-hipsta-yuppie-toy for $5 coffee drinkers in SF or NYC or Tokyo, but really? I think you just might be missing something good and yummy by judging it by its cover and label.
__________________
- Sug

b/w guy.

flickr | RFF Gallery | Buy my prints on RFF Classifieds | Instagram | Portfolio

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2016   #322
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexandru_voicu View Post
What about the build quality between the C-Sonnar and the new J-3, did anyone have the chance the compare them side by side? I have the C-Sonnar but, as an admirer Jupiter lenses, I must admit I'm seriously thinking about the new J-3. Does the J-3 exhibit the same focus shift, for what aperture is focus optimized?

Many thanks.
It's apparently right on the money with M9 wide open. It's made of brass, if anything the build should be superior to the Cosina ZM, which is a light construction in comparison: though perfectly fine of course.

"The focus is accurate across range on my M9." Brian, from here:
https://www.leicaplace.com/threads/j...mography.1443/

Another selling point: this lens will close focus to .7 meter.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2016   #323
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Today at B&H: You Pay: $799.00

For the Nokton 1.5
And $1201 for the CV ZM 1.5

Neither of which are a new LTM lens.

If you don't care about LTM then yes, perhaps one would want the Nokton for $150 more, but that depends on the rendering you are going for. modern vs old.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2016   #324
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
 
bobby_novatron's Avatar
 
bobby_novatron is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: the Great White North (Canada)
Age: 47
Posts: 1,224
FWIW I did a comparison of 4 fast 50's including the new Jupiter-3+. The images can be found here:

http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/s...34#post2585034

I compared the original J-3, the new J-3+, the Opton Sonnar, and the Nokton ASPH.

Not a scientific test by any means but it might be helpful to some people.
__________________
my Flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobby_novatron
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2016   #325
fer_fdi
Registered User
 
fer_fdi's Avatar
 
fer_fdi is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Barcelona & Empordą, Spain
Posts: 379
Quote:
Originally Posted by valdas View Post
I bought J3 a week ago and paid 120€. Glass is very nice, only focusing is stiff. So I asked for CLA and collimation to fit my M cameras. It will cost me 20-30€. That is in Lithuania. So 150€ in total. I don't see any reason why I would ever pay 600€.
I think part of FSU lenses is what you get (a lot!) for little money.
If you make them expensive but with the same performance it's not very interesting anymore, imho.
I have a very very good 1955 KMZ Jupiter-8 that was $70, that's great.
Same lens for $300, not so. I'd buy something else for that money, maybe a Voigtlander or a Canon.
For 600 Euro I'd buy an "as new" ZM lens, not the J-3+, sorry.
And for J-3 character, I'd buy an original J-3, which is already expensive for $200, but with patience you may find a good one.

But of course, that's just how I see it.
I understand and respect other's POV
__________________
~
Fer
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2016   #326
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
For the Nokton 1.5
And $1201 for the CV ZM 1.5

Neither of which are a new LTM lens.

If you don't care about LTM then yes, perhaps one would want the Nokton for $150 more, but that depends on the rendering you are going for. modern vs old.
Yes, the comparisons in price with the Nokton are silly anyway, because it's a totally different lens, basically a pre-asph 50 Lux, which is wonderful of course, and was the design which supplanted the Sonnars. But the Sonnars look different, and if you can't see that or don't care you don't consider this lens anyway.

And if you live in eastern Europe, you can see many old J3s and test each, plus 600USD is much money there. In America sorting through J3s is a greater pain, and returning the bad ones a nightmare. I don't even buy Russian lenses any more for this reason, I've seen enough copies with clean glass and terrible mechanics.

If the lens was priced at 450USD, they would probably triple sales, no doubt. But a new clean J3 with .7 CF, modern coatings, in brass with good calibration was simply unobtainable two months ago at any price.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2016   #327
DrMcCoy
Registered User
 
DrMcCoy is offline
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by coelacanth View Post
$5 coffee drinkers in SF or NYC or Tokyo
Where is this mythical "$5 coffee" in major cities? Plz tell me whr 2 cop in LA so I can stop being poor.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2016   #328
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
For the Nokton 1.5
And $1201 for the CV ZM 1.5

Neither of which are a new LTM lens.

If you don't care about LTM then yes, perhaps one would want the Nokton for $150 more, but that depends on the rendering you are going for. modern vs old.
I have a ltm Nokton 50/1.5 and I have several Sonnar 5cm 1,5 J-3 and Zeiss lenses that Brain adjusted for me in the past.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Cat in a bag??
Old 02-19-2016   #329
Alberti
Registered User
 
Alberti's Avatar
 
Alberti is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Holland
Posts: 265
Cat in a bag??

Interesting pictures on the LOMO website: Some like the portraits and the concert show why this is a nice lens.
However, the cat in a bag has backfocus. Like my own J-3.
In Holland we talk about buying a 'cat in bag' when one gets less than expected. Like buying on the 'Bay.
I hope this lens is better than this picture and this proverb promis.
__________________
Leica aficionado
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2016   #330
DominikDUK
Registered User
 
DominikDUK's Avatar
 
DominikDUK is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 925
If you find a 50mm Sonnar without focus shift I'll be interested of hearing about it, because currently I am unaware of any such beast. Even the C-Sonnar has focus shift and it isn't even a true Sonnar. Also going after images on the LOMOgraphy website is always a bad idea.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2016   #331
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by DominikDUK View Post
Also going after images on the LOMOgraphy website is always a bad idea.
Agreed, it is as if they deliberately make them lo-fi/blurry.

The books that came with my Horizon Perfekt and with my Minitar 32 are full of blurry images. But mine taken with the camera, and with that lens, are sharp and 'properly' exposed!
I guess they set the bar low, so the avg user is not disappointed by him/her not knowing how to focus/expose etc (unless that is the look they are going for..)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2016   #332
alexandru_voicu
Registered User
 
alexandru_voicu is online now
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by DominikDUK View Post
If you find a 50mm Sonnar without focus shift I'll be interested of hearing about it, because currently I am unaware of any such beast. Even the C-Sonnar has focus shift and it isn't even a true Sonnar. Also going after images on the LOMOgraphy website is always a bad idea.
Why isn't the C-Sonnar a true Sonnar?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2016   #333
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexandru_voicu View Post
Why isn't the C-Sonnar a true Sonnar?
Because it's missing an element.

Then again: Sonnar is a Zeiss trademark, they can call anything Sonnar they want.

Roland.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2016   #334
DominikDUK
Registered User
 
DominikDUK's Avatar
 
DominikDUK is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 925
The C-Sonnar is a 6/4 (Ernostar) construction a nice lens but not a Sonnar in fact it predates the Sonnar one could say it is the Sonnars direct predecessor. They are very close though they also share the same designer
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2016   #335
David Hughes
Registered User
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberti View Post
Interesting pictures on the LOMO website: Some like the portraits and the concert show why this is a nice lens.
However, the cat in a bag has backfocus. Like my own J-3.
In Holland we talk about buying a 'cat in bag' when one gets less than expected. Like buying on the 'Bay.
I hope this lens is better than this picture and this proverb promis.
Hi,

We also have sayings about cats in bags. F'instance, letting the cat out of the bag is discovering or revealing something about a deception. And buying a pig in a poke means buying something unchecked. You buy a pig it's put in the poke and you get home and find it's a cat. Although, the word 'poke' for bag seems only to be used in Scotland and the north of England.

The other joke is being asked in shops if you'd like a poke. It's ambiguous and also suggests your about to be hit or punched... Usually the joke is played on us foreigners.

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2016   #336
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
 
Dante_Stella's Avatar
 
Dante_Stella is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by DominikDUK View Post
The C-Sonnar is a 6/4 (Ernostar) construction a nice lens but not a Sonnar in fact it predates the Sonnar one could say it is the Sonnars direct predecessor. They are very close though they also share the same designer
There is no Ernostar with a triple rear group. You're just splitting hairs to differentiate the Judaean People's Front from the People's Front of Judaea (to quote the Life of Brian).

Sonnar is a trade name owned by Zeiss, and that imprimatur is the beginning and end of what is a "Sonnar." The C-Sonnar is a Sonnar. You can gripe about the replacement of a low power element with multi coated airspace, but it does not change things one bit. It is a modern update of the Opton, revised to reflect what modern glass can do. And the modern glass you can get.

Nikkors, Canons/Serenars, and Jupiters are not "Sonnars" writ large. They are close copies of one 1931 lens sold as a Contax Sonnar. All of their computations vary from the original.

Dante
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2016   #337
DominikDUK
Registered User
 
DominikDUK's Avatar
 
DominikDUK is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 925
Zeiss is the culprit as is Cosina constantly recycling lens names that have little to do with the construction. The C-Sonnar is the closest we have come to a true classic Sonnar since the 1960's but it isn't 100% identical, the C-Sonnar is sometimes refered to as Ernostar/Sonnar Hybrid and as you said Zeiss owns the Trademark and can do with it what it wants.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2016   #338
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
 
nukecoke's Avatar
 
nukecoke is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Sweden/China
Posts: 513
To me, in the case of triplet/ernostar/sonnar categorization, the rear group does not matter, it's the element(s) they insert between the first and second element of triplet that matters. I'm a layman and this is just my observation.



Anyway, according to Zenit, the new superstar http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/l...jupiter-3.html:

On the page it says the C Sonnar originates from some experimental lens "number 33" of Zeiss back in 1939. I wonder how did they call such formula back then? Not sure if there's more persuasive German pages out there, if they had backup documents not taken by the Soviets.

BTW: I like that Zenit added the J3+ to their archive page despite there's not old fashioned information like center/edge resolution and so on
__________________
tumblr

flickr

About Film Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-27-2016   #339
alexandru_voicu
Registered User
 
alexandru_voicu is online now
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Posts: 55
Well, after a few days of deliberation, I did what my irrational part of me dictated to. I bought the J3+ this evening. A few observations:

1. Very compact, good looking.
2. Not impressively well built. Side by side, my C-Sonnar ZM looks better. The J3+, however, looks a tad less delicate, which is nice.
3. The machining is rather disappointing. I disassembled many J-8s and I can tell they were better machined, including the later ones. For instance, the edges of the cam feel a little hoarse. Also, I've seen much smoother focus.
4. The M adapter is on the cheap side, looking exactly as the Chinese copies you can find on ebay for several bucks. It is not even close to my Voigtlander adapter.
5. The boxing is fine, but still on the cheap side.
6. I hate the fact that they wrote on the front ring "New Jupiter 3+". What's with that "new"? It makes the lens sound cheap. It's not a detergent. And it's wrong from a logical point of view. Is there an old "Jupiter 3+"? No.

I already shot a film and it is now hanging to dry. Let's hope that the optics will not disappoint.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #340
alexandru_voicu
Registered User
 
alexandru_voicu is online now
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Posts: 55
I scanned the test film and the results are not encouraging. At 0.7m, wide open, the lens back focuses by 2.5 cm on my recently adjusted Zeiss ikon. Being a sonnar, it should have actually front focused a bit. For me, this was the last drop. I have to return it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #341
fer_fdi
Registered User
 
fer_fdi's Avatar
 
fer_fdi is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Barcelona & Empordą, Spain
Posts: 379
thank you very much for your realistic review Alexandru!
That's why I said it was way too expensive

it would be good to see a couple of test pictures
__________________
~
Fer
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #342
alexandru_voicu
Registered User
 
alexandru_voicu is online now
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Posts: 55
I'm glad you find my "observations" useful, thank you. The glass itself is not bad. Actually, I find it quite sharp wide open and with less focus shift than my C-Sonnar. Surely, the focus does move backwards while you close down, but to a lesser degree. I shall try to post a couple of photos later on.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #343
fad gadget
Registered User
 
fad gadget's Avatar
 
fad gadget is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: vancouver, bc
Posts: 119
On both my Monochrom M246 and my M240, I find wide open from .7 totally across the entire focusing range to be spot on, no back, nor front focusing issues.
There is some very slight focus shift between f2.8/4, far less than my ZM Sonnar and I prefer the look of the J3+.

I prefer the craftsmanship of the J3+ as well, I don't think I'll encounter the famous wobble on this one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #344
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
 
coelacanth's Avatar
 
coelacanth is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,431
Interesting observations from alexandru_voicu and fad gadget.

I had mine for a few days and the experience was closer to what alexandru_voicu said. Mine had

• Slight play in focusing ring
• Not "wobble" level but the front part of the lens could shift tiny bit
• Focusing was better than old Russian lens I once had, but rather inconsistent smoothness and I could fee some rougher spots here and there.
• Had several black specks of dust and a couple of fibers in elements.
• Aperture ring was drier feeling in action. My Contax Option Sonnar 50/2 has a lot smoother action.
• Back focusing a bit (was expecting some shift due to Sonnar design so I wasn't really put off by it tho)

I think it is definitely far far better than the old Jupiter for overall construction and the brass barrel looked great. Focus shifting (whichever way it should go) was expected and it is a character lens I was OK with it, but I ended up returning it as the overall quality was not what I was expecting from the price point and some early reports I've read (at least my copy was no where near "velvet smooth" or "super smooth"). I wasn't super disappointed and had hard time deciding, but in the end the combination of overall construction quality and the price point wasn't working for me.

I did like the pictures I got from my limited time with the lens. I wanted to shoot more, but I needed to decide quick so the lens remained returnable.


Smashing hair you got there by Suguru Nishioka, on Flickr

Shot with New Jupiter 3+ on M4-P. Neopan 400 at 640.

Again, I LOVE the Sonnar look, and I could imagine myself giving it another try in the future (maybe send it off to Don or someone to really perfect it, then keep for good) I ever regretted selling the Nikkor SC 50/2. I wanted this lens to be IT, but I'm opting to use my Contax Sonnar 50/2 (already had it, part of Contax IIa kit I got for $150) with the latest Amedeo adapter ($200).
__________________
- Sug

b/w guy.

flickr | RFF Gallery | Buy my prints on RFF Classifieds | Instagram | Portfolio

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #345
alexandru_voicu
Registered User
 
alexandru_voicu is online now
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by fad gadget View Post
On both my Monochrom M246 and my M240, I find wide open from .7 totally across the entire focusing range to be spot on, no back, nor front focusing issues.
There is some very slight focus shift between f2.8/4, far less than my ZM Sonnar and I prefer the look of the J3+.

I prefer the craftsmanship of the J3+ as well, I don't think I'll encounter the famous wobble on this one.
As for the focus shift, yes, these are my findings, too. But with regards on the colimation, I guess that you, sir, are lucky. Or maybe I'm unlucky. My Zeiss Ikon was recently adjusted in Oberkochen, together with all my ZM lenses. The J3+ does not reach infinity on my rangefinder by quite a large margin, nor on its adapter, nor or my Voigtlander adapter. So it has the be the lens itself. I truly wanted it to work out and I would have preferred it to my C-Sonnar, which is larger, more prone to focus shift and more delicate in appearance. Unfortunately, it doesn't.

See attached one frame from the roll of Tri-x I shot last evening. I focused on the left eye, the focus is on the right. Even so, nice contrast, nice rendering.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg img010.jpg (15.9 KB, 47 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #346
Jan Pedersen
Registered User
 
Jan Pedersen is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Vicinity of Portland OR
Age: 62
Posts: 564
As with the old J3's, there's obviously also some sample variations on the new J3+
My example, focus is spot on with the M246. Is has a slight play in the focus but nothing I would call a wobble. Focus is evenly smooth in the whole range.
__________________
_____________________________
http://janlpedersen.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #347
fad gadget
Registered User
 
fad gadget's Avatar
 
fad gadget is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: vancouver, bc
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexandru_voicu View Post
As for the focus shift, yes, these are my findings, too. But with regards on the colimation, I guess that you, sir, are lucky. Or maybe I'm unlucky. My Zeiss Ikon was recently adjusted in Oberkochen, together with all my ZM lenses. The J3+ does not reach infinity on my rangefinder by quite a large margin, nor on its adapter, nor or my Voigtlander adapter. So it has the be the lens itself. I truly wanted it to work out and I would have preferred it to my C-Sonnar, which is larger, more prone to focus shift and more delicate in appearance. Unfortunately, it doesn't.

See attached one frame from the roll of Tri-x I shot last evening. I focused on the left eye, the focus is on the right. Even so, nice contrast, nice rendering.
That's unfortunate, have you tried it on another body other than ZI?

Mine has no problem on any of my M's. digital, or film.
I just tried it on my lllF as well after reading your post, no problem with infinity focus there either.

I can definitely see it in your photo, but it seems to be taken on an angle, which would move the opposite eye out of the plane of focus.
However, that will not account for the focusing issue at infinity.

cheers/ken.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2016   #348
alexandru_voicu
Registered User
 
alexandru_voicu is online now
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by fad gadget View Post
That's unfortunate, have you tried it on another body other than ZI?

Mine has no problem on any of my M's. digital, or film.
I just tried it on my lllF as well after reading your post, no problem with infinity focus there either.

I can definitely see it in your photo, but it seems to be taken on an angle, which would move the opposite eye out of the plane of focus.
However, that will not account for the focusing issue at infinity.

cheers/ken.
Hi Ken,

Thank you for your input. I actually did try it on a Bessa R3A body, which, unfortunately, is slightly misaligned at infinity, both vertically and horizontally. Even so, I found that the "misalignment" got worse with the J3+. Moreover, as I wanted to rule out my ZI and ZM lenses, I borrowed a Nokton 50/1.5 and it focused fine on the ZI body. In other words, six lenses (five that I own plus the one I borrowed) are focusing fine on the ZI, except the J3+. I think it is "beyond reasonable doubt" that the J3+ is the culprit. Which is such a pity, as I am convinced it has great glass.

Alex
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-29-2016   #349
fad gadget
Registered User
 
fad gadget's Avatar
 
fad gadget is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: vancouver, bc
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexandru_voicu View Post
Hi Ken,

Thank you for your input. I actually did try it on a Bessa R3A body, which, unfortunately, is slightly misaligned at infinity, both vertically and horizontally. Even so, I found that the "misalignment" got worse with the J3+. Moreover, as I wanted to rule out my ZI and ZM lenses, I borrowed a Nokton 50/1.5 and it focused fine on the ZI body. In other words, six lenses (five that I own plus the one I borrowed) are focusing fine on the ZI, except the J3+. I think it is "beyond reasonable doubt" that the J3+ is the culprit. Which is such a pity, as I am convinced it has great glass.

Alex
Hi Alex,

That's a drag, sounds like you've found the culprit.

I'd exchange it for another one, I'm convinced it's a great piece of glass.
Brian Sweeney just posted some comparison shots against a early 50's Sonnar on Leica Place, the resemblance is amazing!
I'm sure it was modelled after it, always loved that lens!

cheers/ken.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2016   #350
jcb4718
Registered User
 
jcb4718 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 92
I echo the praise of the Zeiss Opton. I have one with the Amedeo adapter. It's a superb lens. It's at its best (or should I say displays its characteristics best) when stopped down a little (say f4). The aperture is unusual. The blades have a weird shape (in fact it looks like there are two sets of blades, when viewed from the back). This makes the aperture circumference 'wavy' rather than circular. So f4 is some kind of weighted average of, say, f3.8-f4.2 or something like that. In optical terms this has the effect of blurring the edges of out-of-focus areas e.g. out-of-focus discs. Foliage is the give away, in my view. Lenses with 'sharp' out-of-focus discs tend to 'mince' foliage but with the Opton it's wonderfully 'blurry'. Nice contrast, too. A really great lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-03-2016   #351
alexandru_voicu
Registered User
 
alexandru_voicu is online now
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Posts: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by fad gadget View Post
Hi Alex,

That's a drag, sounds like you've found the culprit.

I'd exchange it for another one, I'm convinced it's a great piece of glass.
Brian Sweeney just posted some comparison shots against a early 50's Sonnar on Leica Place, the resemblance is amazing!
I'm sure it was modelled after it, always loved that lens!

cheers/ken.
Hi Ken,

I actually bought a second one (I returned the first) and, unfortunately, the back focus in still there. In addition, I also noticed a speck between the internal elements. It is really a shame.

Alex
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:10.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.