Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Canon Leica Screw Mount Film Rangefinders

Canon Leica Screw Mount Film Rangefinders For classic Leica Screw Mount Canon Rangefinders.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Some questions about Canon LTM 35/2
Old 10-16-2019   #1
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Some questions about Canon LTM 35/2

I am contemplating getting myself a Canon LTM 35/2 lens, and just want to be sure it's the lens I want.
I have done some research on it and couldn't really find conclusive answers to my questions.

First and main question, how is this lens for distortion? If I shoot the face of a building directly straight on from 25-50 feet, will distortion be noticeable? Does distortion get worse as you get closer?
I'm not really looking for zero distortion, just want to know what to expect.

Second question, how does the lens handle color? Does have high saturation and high contrast? Does it tend towards a color cast? I like the colors I get from my Canon LTM 50/2.2. Will the 35/2 be similar?

Thanks in advance,

Colton
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #2
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 43
Posts: 4,155
You might find the 35/2 has a little more contrast, probably due to more modern coatings and that lens being a bit newer than the 50/2.2. when I had it, I loved my Canon 35/2. I sold it for a Summilux which honestly wasn't better at f2 than the Canon.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #3
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,571
Some call the Canon 35/2 The Japanese Summicron.
It is an excellent (small) lens.
__________________
- Raid
________________

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

Old 10-16-2019   #4
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,116
Hey Colton,

I used to have a Leica 35mm Summicron ASPH but sold it because I always thought it rendered too "heavy". I shoot mostly B&W film and the Cron was too heavy on contrast. The 35mm f2 Canon LTM on the other hand renders "just right" for my tastes. It's higher contrast than the 35mm f1.8 Canon LTM but not as high contrast as the Cron. Seems "smoother" if that'a a thing.

I've never noticed bad distortion with the lens, but I honestly don't shoot architecture with it. And the little bit of color I've shot with it, I found it rendered very neutral.

I prefer a more neutral look from the lenses on my Leica, not a "modern" high contrast look, or a "vintage" very low contrast look. Found the 35mm f2 Canon LTM to be my favorite 35mm rangefinder lens on my Leicas, as I've never been able to afford the Nikkor 3.5cm f1.8 in LTM.

Hope that helps.

Best,
-Tim
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #5
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
You might find the 35/2 has a little more contrast, probably due to more modern coatings and that lens being a bit newer than the 50/2.2. when I had it, I loved my Canon 35/2. I sold it for a Summilux which honestly wasn't better at f2 than the Canon.

Phil Forrest
Thanks Phil.
I think the 50/2.2 came out in 1961, and the 35/2 came out in 1962, so I imagine the coatings are similar, but I'm just guessing

Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Some call the Canon 35/2 The Japanese Summicron.
It is an excellent (small) lens.
Thanks Raid

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmyjoe View Post
Hey Colton,

I used to have a Leica 35mm Summicron ASPH but sold it because I always thought it rendered too "heavy". I shoot mostly B&W film and the Cron was too heavy on contrast. The 35mm f2 Canon LTM on the other hand renders "just right" for my tastes. It's higher contrast than the 35mm f1.8 Canon LTM but not as high contrast as the Cron. Seems "smoother" if that'a a thing.

I've never noticed bad distortion with the lens, but I honestly don't shoot architecture with it. And the little bit of color I've shot with it, I found it rendered very neutral.

I prefer a more neutral look from the lenses on my Leica, not a "modern" high contrast look, or a "vintage" very low contrast look. Found the 35mm f2 Canon LTM to be my favorite 35mm rangefinder lens on my Leicas, as I've never been able to afford the Nikkor 3.5cm f1.8 in LTM.

Hope that helps.

Best,
-Tim
Thanks for the info Tim. I totally get the "smoother"thing, and that's what I'm looking for. Rich colors, without hard contrast.
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #6
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 3,006
Colton, shoot me a PM. I'll lend you mine, and you can find out for yourself whether or not you like it. Online reviews, image samples, and written opinions can only tell you so much.

p.s. Not sure if there are any brick wall shots in the Canon 35/2 LTM image thread here on RFF.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr

Last edited by dourbalistar : 10-16-2019 at 14:40. Reason: Add RFF image thread link
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #7
Peter Jennings
Registered User
 
Peter Jennings's Avatar
 
Peter Jennings is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seoul
Posts: 600
In my experience, it’s a mid-contrast lens with neutral colors. It spends more time on my M2 than any other lens. I have plenty of samples from it in b&w on my Flickr page. As for distortion, I’ve never noticed any - but I’ve never tested for it, either. Highly recommended!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #8
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
Colton, shoot me a PM. I'll lend you mine, and you can find out for yourself whether or not you like it. Online reviews, image samples, and written opinions can only tell you so much.

p.s. Not sure if there are any brick wall shots in the Canon 35/2 LTM image thread here on RFF.
Thanks for the offer. PM sent.
I agree, image samples and reviews will only tell so much. Everything I've seen and read about this lens looks quite good, I just haven't seen much info about distortion.
That thread is great with a lot of good photos, many of them yours

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Jennings View Post
In my experience, itís a mid-contrast lens with neutral colors. It spends more time on my M2 than any other lens. I have plenty of samples from it in b&w on my Flickr page. As for distortion, Iíve never noticed any - but Iíve never tested for it, either. Highly recommended!
Thank you Peter, good to know.
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #9
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,571
M8 with Canon 35/2: Pensacola. Florida.





__________________
- Raid
________________

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

Old 10-16-2019   #10
Bingley
Registered User
 
Bingley's Avatar
 
Bingley is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 5,803
I’ve had my sample of the Canon 35mm f2.0 for a number of years; I sold other Canon 35s but kept this one. Although I mainly shoot black and white with it, I’ve posted some color photos here which may give you a sense of how the lens renders. I can’t address the distortion question because I use this lens most often for street photography. For color, the lens does not give the desaturated look like you get from the Canon 35/2.8 or the 35/1.8. In that sense, it’s more modern in rendering. But it’s not as contrasty as, say, the CV Skopar 35. I think it hits a sweet spot that would be compatible with the look you’re getting from the Canon 50mm f2.2.

Sevilla by bingley0522, on Flickr

Scooters, Alfas, and antipasti by bingley0522, on Flickr


Conversation by bingley0522, on Flickr
__________________
Steve

FS: Pentax MX, Voigtlander Ultron 40/2.0 SLII in Pentax K-mount, Takumar 100/2.8 and 35/3.5 lenses: See my ads in Classifieds

M3, M2, R2A, IIIc, IVSB2, & T, and assorted LTM & M lenses
Minolta XD11, Pentax ME Super, and assorted MD Rokkor and Takumar lenses, Rolleicord III, Rolleicord Vb, Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS

My Flickr
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #11
Bingley
Registered User
 
Bingley's Avatar
 
Bingley is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 5,803
Footnote: I agree with Peter Jennings’ assessment above. And, needless to say, the 35/2.0 is very sharp... nice bokeh too.
__________________
Steve

FS: Pentax MX, Voigtlander Ultron 40/2.0 SLII in Pentax K-mount, Takumar 100/2.8 and 35/3.5 lenses: See my ads in Classifieds

M3, M2, R2A, IIIc, IVSB2, & T, and assorted LTM & M lenses
Minolta XD11, Pentax ME Super, and assorted MD Rokkor and Takumar lenses, Rolleicord III, Rolleicord Vb, Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS

My Flickr
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #12
Ste_S
Registered User
 
Ste_S is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 273
Anyone shot the later (P era) Canon 50mm 1.8 ltm alongside the 35mm f2 and 2.8 ?

Quite pleased with how the 50 1.8 renders colour, and would like to get a similar 35mm. Pricing for the f2 and 2.8 versions seems broadly similar.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #13
Bingley
Registered User
 
Bingley's Avatar
 
Bingley is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 5,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ste_S View Post
Anyone shot the later (P era) Canon 50mm 1.8 ltm alongside the 35mm f2 and 2.8 ?

Quite pleased with how the 50 1.8 renders colour, and would like to get a similar 35mm. Pricing for the f2 and 2.8 versions seems broadly similar.
Yes, I had both the 35/1.8 and the 35/2.0 for awhile. Kept the latter, in part bc it handles flare better. The 35/1.8 gives a much more vintage look, both in terms of contrast and color saturation. This can result in lovely color images, but the lens flares badly if you point it at a light source, like a window or an open door. I don’t think the look of the 35/1.8 is all that similar to that of the 50/1.8, even though they’re from the same era. Look at Dante Stella’s article on Canon lenses for Leica cameras. The 50/1.8 is an excellent all round lens that handles flare better than the 35. There photos on my Flickr taken with all of these lenses if you want to see samples.

Sorry... I misread your post. You were asking about the Canon 50/1.8, not the 35/1.8. I think the short answer is that the 50/1.8 is very compatible with the 35/2.0. The look of the 35/2.8... not so much. The 35/2.8 is an older design and while it has its charms (and is tiny), it renders color in a mch more desaturated, pastel like way compared to the 50/1.8. If you want a Canon 35 that matches the look of the Canon 50/1.8, look for the Canon 35/2.0.
__________________
Steve

FS: Pentax MX, Voigtlander Ultron 40/2.0 SLII in Pentax K-mount, Takumar 100/2.8 and 35/3.5 lenses: See my ads in Classifieds

M3, M2, R2A, IIIc, IVSB2, & T, and assorted LTM & M lenses
Minolta XD11, Pentax ME Super, and assorted MD Rokkor and Takumar lenses, Rolleicord III, Rolleicord Vb, Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS

My Flickr
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-16-2019   #14
Ste_S
Registered User
 
Ste_S is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 273
@Bingley Thanks, 35 f2 it is. I very much like the colour rendering of the 50 1.8, it’s just ‘right’ as opposed to something like Nikon F mount lenses which I find can be too contrasty and saturated at times. For example I daren’t run Ektar through Nikkor glass as the results tend to be a bit full on
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-17-2019   #15
kuuan
loves old lenses
 
kuuan's Avatar
 
kuuan is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,608
looking at my samples I just was about to say that it is pretty much distortion free:


Untitled
by andreas, on Flickr

the one above taken with Sony A7, here all my photos taken with this lens: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/...14143659/page1

but then I realized that the sample above is somewhat cropped and so are all distortion free samples.
If I remember right I must have corrected their distortion and that may have been the main reason for the slight crops

here 2 un-cropped photos taken with Sony A7 and these do show some distortion:


Untitled
by andreas, on Flickr


Untitled
by andreas, on Flickr

hopefully I shall find the time coming days to make a few shots to show better just how much distortion there is
__________________
my photos on flickr: : https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-17-2019   #16
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
M8 with Canon 35/2: Pensacola. Florida.





Thanks Raid, those look great.
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-17-2019   #17
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingley View Post
Iíve had my sample of the Canon 35mm f2.0 for a number of years; I sold other Canon 35s but kept this one. Although I mainly shoot black and white with it, Iíve posted some color photos here which may give you a sense of how the lens renders. I canít address the distortion question because I use this lens most often for street photography. For color, the lens does not give the desaturated look like you get from the Canon 35/2.8 or the 35/1.8. In that sense, itís more modern in rendering. But itís not as contrasty as, say, the CV Skopar 35. I think it hits a sweet spot that would be compatible with the look youíre getting from the Canon 50mm f2.2.

Sevilla by bingley0522, on Flickr

Scooters, Alfas, and antipasti by bingley0522, on Flickr


Conversation by bingley0522, on Flickr
Thanks Bingley. Your color film shots with the Canon 35/2 show the color qualities that I am looking for, and have a similar feel to what my 50/2.2 gives.
Here's an example from my 50/2.2 that I think shows its color qualities well.


Untitled by Colton Allen, on Flickr
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-17-2019   #18
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by kuuan View Post
looking at my samples I just was about to say that it is pretty much distortion free:


Untitled
by andreas, on Flickr

the one above taken with Sony A7, here all my photos taken with this lens: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/...14143659/page1

but then I realized that the sample above is somewhat cropped and so are all distortion free samples.
If I remember right I must have corrected their distortion and that may have been the main reason for the slight crops

here 2 un-cropped photos taken with Sony A7 and these do show some distortion:


Untitled
by andreas, on Flickr


Untitled
by andreas, on Flickr

hopefully I shall find the time coming days to make a few shots to show better just how much distortion there is
Thank you Andreas.
Your last shot shows a bit of barrel distortion. If that's the worst it gets I can certainly live with it
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2019   #19
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Thank you everyone for your help.
Last night I bit the bullet and ordered myself a nice looking Canon LTM 35/2. Hopefully everything works out with it.
Will keep y'all posted...
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-18-2019   #20
Bingley
Registered User
 
Bingley's Avatar
 
Bingley is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 5,803
Congrats and good luck with it... I plan to shoot with mine on Sunday...
__________________
Steve

FS: Pentax MX, Voigtlander Ultron 40/2.0 SLII in Pentax K-mount, Takumar 100/2.8 and 35/3.5 lenses: See my ads in Classifieds

M3, M2, R2A, IIIc, IVSB2, & T, and assorted LTM & M lenses
Minolta XD11, Pentax ME Super, and assorted MD Rokkor and Takumar lenses, Rolleicord III, Rolleicord Vb, Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS

My Flickr
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2019   #21
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Yesterday, my Canon LTM 35/2 arrived from Japan. The lens is nearly immaculate and looks basically like new. Focus is smooth, and aperture ring feels nice. I managed to get out yesterday and take a few shots with the lens on my Canon 7. I need to get a better feel for using the lens, but initial results look pretty good to me.

First, here's a photo of the lens on my Leica M2.



And here's the very first frame taken with the lens.


Untitled by Colton Allen, on Flickr
Canon 7 Rangefinder
Canon LTM 35/2
Expired Ferrania Solaris 200
Epson V750
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2019   #22
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,571
Super result! I like it.
__________________
- Raid
________________

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

Old 10-24-2019   #23
Larry H-L
Registered User
 
Larry H-L is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 636
Colton, It looks great on the M2, and the results look really good too!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2019   #24
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 3,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift1 View Post
And here's the very first frame taken with the lens.


Untitled by Colton Allen, on Flickr
Canon 7 Rangefinder
Canon LTM 35/2
Expired Ferrania Solaris 200
Epson V750
Awesome results, Colton, just as I expected! I love the inclusion of the manhole cover in the lower left, trademark Colton composition.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2019   #25
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Super result! I like it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry H-L View Post
Colton, It looks great on the M2, and the results look really good too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
Awesome results, Colton, just as I expected! I love the inclusion of the manhole cover in the lower left, trademark Colton composition.
Thanks guys

Here's another from the few shots I did with the lens yesterday.


Canon 7 Rangefinder
Canon LTM 35/2
Expired Ferrania Solaris 200
Nikon Coolscan V ED
__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-24-2019   #26
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,116
Hey Colton,

Congrats on the new lens. Looks like the two of you are getting on quite nicely. Wonderful shots.

Best,
-Tim
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-21-2019   #27
Swift1
Registered User
 
Swift1's Avatar
 
Swift1 is online now
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Talent, Oregon.
Posts: 2,024
I've had this lens for a few weeks now and I wanted to follow up on my post and answer my own questions.

So far I'm really liking the Canon 35/2, and I particularly like the way it renders colors. I find it has really smooth tonal rendering, and colors are rich without feeling oversaturated. It's actually quite similar to the CV Skopar 35, with the Skopar having just a bit more saturation.

The Canon 35/2 does exhibit noticeable barrel distortion in certain situations. For most, it's probably not an issue at all, but I shoot buildings straight on fairly often so it shows up to me. A plus 1.5 correction in PS takes care of it through.

Here's a frame that shows the extent of the distortion.

__________________
Colton

If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk. The Ugly
My Flickr
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2019   #28
calijax
Registered User
 
calijax is offline
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1
Thanks for following up on this. Useful.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2020   #29
kurotama
Registered User
 
kurotama's Avatar
 
kurotama is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Age: 59
Posts: 72
There are two types of 35/2. One that is original is made for B/W photos and new model made for color photos. Canon refined the optics and coatings at the new model to slightly better corner resolution, much richer color rendering and softer bokeh.
It's an obvious change though they still called the same Canon lens 35mm F2.0. The difference is existence of front ring engraving "Canon Camera Co., Inc."
Ones with the "Canon Camera Co., Inc." are older model, while newer model omits the company name.
Check it out and you feel lucky if you have a new one which is super rare to find in the used market.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2020   #30
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,571
I will check out my Canon 35/2 to see if it is "old" or "new" model.
__________________
- Raid
________________

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

Old 01-19-2020   #31
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 3,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by kurotama View Post
There are two types of 35/2. One that is original is made for B/W photos and new model made for color photos. Canon refined the optics and coatings at the new model to slightly better corner resolution, much richer color rendering and softer bokeh.
It's an obvious change though they still called the same Canon lens 35mm F2.0. The difference is existence of front ring engraving "Canon Camera Co., Inc."
Ones with the "Canon Camera Co., Inc." are older model, while newer model omits the company name.
Check it out and you feel lucky if you have a new one which is super rare to find in the used market.
Interesting, kurotama, thanks for sharing! Do those two version correspond to Version I and Version II on the Canon Lens Hall?

FWIW, I have the older version. I guess that works out for me since I shoot a lot more B&W.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-19-2020   #32
Timmyjoe
Registered User
 
Timmyjoe's Avatar
 
Timmyjoe is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,116
Well that's interesting about there being a "new" and "old" version. Just checked, if what's listed above is accurate, mine would be the "new" version. Just took a look on the auction site, seems about half of the lenses listed have "Canon Camera Co., Inc." written on the beauty ring and about half don't. Wonder how many of each were made.

Best,
-Tim
  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 13:01.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.