Cheap portrait lens for my M3
Old 07-23-2014   #1
3.0
Registered User
 
3.0 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 16
Cheap portrait lens for my M3

Hey all,

I've been looking at portrait lenses for the M3 and while I don't do a lot of them, I thought it'd be nice to have a more telelens. I currently have a 40mm 1.4 voigtlander and minolta 50mm f/2.

Wanted to get some opinions on the Jupiter-9 85mm f/2 lenses. There seems to be 4 versions a black and a silver, and each with a long thinner and short wider design. Any difference in performance?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #2
siracusa
Registered User
 
siracusa's Avatar
 
siracusa is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 448
Without wishing to hijack your thread as you asked specifically about the j9, if you're looking for a reasonably priced portrait lens, have you considered the 9cm f4 Elmar in ltm mount? Outstanding value, an excellent portrait lens, and you won't run into the focusing problems that a J9 might well present (there are numerous posts about the focus issue with the J9 on rff, along with success stories such as johann's).
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #3
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
 
Dez's Avatar
 
Dez is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minnesota North Woods
Posts: 1,531
There will tend to be more variation between examples than between types, as quality control was often iffy. The J9 is capable of excellent results, but tends to back focus significantly at short focusing distances on a Leica body. Adjusting them to focus correctly at close range is quite easy, but rather fiddly and time consuming. Here's a link to one method.

http://pentax-manuals.com/repairs/j9collim.pdf

Although the title is wrong (adjusting the focus has nothing to do with collimating, which is a major effort usually only possible in the factory), the method is valid. I check infinity focus with a ground glass at the film plane rather than the SLR method which looks elegant, but I haven't tried it. You will usually need to add a thicker shim behind the optial block to get it to focus correctly at, say 2m.With the thicker shim in place the aperture index will be in the wrong place. Make a new one at the top of the lens, slacken the three grub screws holding the aperture ring on, and rotate it to match the new index correctly, and tighten them back up. It's easier than it sounds. Of course the low-work alternative is to check the close focus accuracy against a target, remember how much it shifts, and correct accordingly. Here's a test I did on a Jupiter 3 at 1m distance that shows that it back focuses by approximately one inch.





Another approach is to but a screwmount Elmar 90 f4. It is slow, and not very contrasty, but you probably don't want too much contrast in a portrait lens. It's a popular lens which Leitz manufactured for about 30 years. It is also dirt cheap. You can easily pick up a good one for $100.

Cheers,
Dez
  Reply With Quote

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143678
Old 07-23-2014   #4
leicapixie
Registered User
 
leicapixie is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto.Canada
Posts: 1,577
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=143678

A very simple solution.
Crop.
Look with the 90mm frame and see the crop.
Use your standard lens and crop.
Magic.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #5
rolfe
Registered User
 
rolfe's Avatar
 
rolfe is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Egremont, MA
Posts: 389
Even if you find a very good example of a J9, you will spend more getting the lubrication replaced and generally overhaulling the lens than you would spend on a thin Leica Tele-Elmarit. Ask me how I know this :-). My J9 sits on the shelf these days.
__________________
My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #6
Brian Legge
Registered User
 
Brian Legge is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,684
Given the need for accurate focus, I'd be reluctant to gamble on a J9 as some (most?) cannot be shimmed to focus accurately from what I've heard.

I would take a look at the Canon 100mm 3.5 LTM, Voigtlander 90mm 3.5 or if you get lucky, Nikkor 105mm 2.5 (I've seen a few LTM ones near $300 recently). The Canon in particular is a steal - and it is tiny.
__________________
Shooting whatever I can get my hands on.
Recent Work
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #7
CNNY
Registered User
 
CNNY's Avatar
 
CNNY is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 1,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by siracusa View Post
if you're looking for a reasonably priced portrait lens, have you considered the 9cm f4 Elmar in ltm mount
This lens is just as easy to find in M-mount, for similar prices. That would save the OP the cost of an ltm-m adapter. Another option is the elmarit 90/2.8. A bit more expensive but highly rated, though I have never owned one.
__________________
instagram and some bits at
otopho on Shapeways
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #8
3.0
Registered User
 
3.0 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 16
Thanks for all the detailed info guys, I think you've convinced me to shy away from the J9.

I'm going to take a look around for the 9cm f/4 elmar and possibly the 90 f/2.8 as well.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #9
hendriphile
Registered User
 
hendriphile's Avatar
 
hendriphile is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by leicapixie View Post
A very simple solution.
Crop.
Look with the 90mm frame and see the crop.
Use your standard lens and crop.
Magic.
What a great idea! I'll have to try it.

BTW a decent used elmarit 90/2.8 (without scratches or fungus) costs ~$1,000 on *bay.
__________________
"It's so heavy! And it's full of numbers!" --- teenaged niece upon meeting my M3.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #10
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
 
Dez's Avatar
 
Dez is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minnesota North Woods
Posts: 1,531
Well....... The latest Elmarit-M would cost that much, but the tele-Elmarit is more like $600, and the longer but just as good original Elmarit might be found under $400 if you're lucky.

Cheers,
Dez
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #11
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
The old 9cm Elmar M - silver thin version, or the first Elmarit 90 are outstanding portrait lenses with a bokeh that you will not easily find nowadays - the iris is just behind the first lens, and in the Elmar the aperture is perfectly circular at every f stop. To compensate for low contrast, use a 100 ISO film and always keep the hood on.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2014   #12
Spicy
Registered User
 
Spicy is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: DC
Age: 32
Posts: 671
i'll speak up on behalf of the Canon 100/3.5. great lens for travel (absolutely tiny and light). not the fastest at 3.5, but that's really only a stop and a half slower than f2.

i had mine overhauled by Youxin when i went down to see him a year or two ago.

a few (minor) points of note -- the design is quite old ergonomically speaking. while optically it's a pretty solid performer, it's not quite "modern" when it comes to having things like:
-aperture ring has no click-stops (you get used to it)
-focus throw is SUUUUUPER long, roughly 270* (also you get used to it. does allow for quite fine degree of focusing precision, which is good, but can be slow if you're looking for street candids)
-aperture ring rotates with the lens barrel, which can be mildly annoying if you're constantly changing aperture (can't do it by feel, as the aforementioned lack of click-stops).
-it's 100mm lens, so if you're picky about framing (anyone using an RF for portraiture really has no right to be), you'll need an accessory viewfinder, a body with 100mm framelines to mount it on, or you'll just have to deal with it.

if you're willing to deal with the quirks mentioned above, it's a *VERY* hard lens to beat at the size/weight/performance for like $120 plus an LTM adapter.
__________________
ID7P0M2F854Ior+50PdV3MSFcC05MNC00
[:] [']
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #13
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,361
Hi,

But, the Jupiter is a pleasant lens to use and dirt cheap.

Why not buy one and then get it checked, cleaned of old lubricant etc and then just use it? My experience of Jupiters and my experience of repairs to lenses like the ones on my M2, IIIC and other pre-war ones, makes me suggest this course.

A Jupiter that's been checked and so on is a thing of beauty and a joy to use. And (again) it won't cost the earth to buy and check etc.

All the other lenses suggested will be old and second-hand as well. So you are taking a chance with them and paying more for just the same risk...

Regards, David

PS I've several ex-USSR lenses (meaning a dozen, at least) and have had no problems with them that I've not had on Leica's finest. Meaning both a Jupiter and Leica lens I own are/were a bit stiff to focus.

PPS (Edit) FWIW, I've had to scrap two Leica lenses as beyond repair. And I've had one cleaned due to haze. The charges for stripping down and testing the U/S Leitz ones were about double the charge for the cleaning the hazy one. The one that was cleaned cost about UKP 20: I've yet to scrap an ex-USSR lens or send one for repair...

FWIW (2), I think the main problem with ex-USSR lenses is that ham-fisted idiots who don't know a collimator from a colander think it is a simple matter to repair or restore them. They are happy to do this because they are cheap lenses and it won't matter if they wreck them, and they often do, and then sell them.

They don't mess around with Leica lenses as they cost serious money. The flaw in this logic is that the low cost of a lens doesn't make you a technical expert. Why they can't see this escapes me at the moment; worse still, they are allowed to vote and wooed by politicians...

Forums where people are told that they can do it easily at home have a lot to answer for, imo.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #14
Schlapp
Registered User
 
Schlapp is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Outer Hebrides, Scotland
Posts: 291
Why not develop techniques to use the lens you have effectively? Just saying
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #15
John E Earley
Tuol Sleng S21-0174
 
John E Earley's Avatar
 
John E Earley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Virginia
Age: 72
Posts: 1,742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicy View Post
i'll speak up on behalf of the Canon 100/3.5. great lens for travel (absolutely tiny and light). not the fastest at 3.5, but that's really only a stop and a half slower than f2.

i had mine overhauled by Youxin when i went down to see him a year or two ago.

a few (minor) points of note -- the design is quite old ergonomically speaking. while optically it's a pretty solid performer, it's not quite "modern" when it comes to having things like:
-aperture ring has no click-stops (you get used to it)
-focus throw is SUUUUUPER long, roughly 270* (also you get used to it. does allow for quite fine degree of focusing precision, which is good, but can be slow if you're looking for street candids)
-aperture ring rotates with the lens barrel, which can be mildly annoying if you're constantly changing aperture (can't do it by feel, as the aforementioned lack of click-stops).
-it's 100mm lens, so if you're picky about framing (anyone using an RF for portraiture really has no right to be), you'll need an accessory viewfinder, a body with 100mm framelines to mount it on, or you'll just have to deal with it.

if you're willing to deal with the quirks mentioned above, it's a *VERY* hard lens to beat at the size/weight/performance for like $120 plus an LTM adapter.
One other minor point - many of them suffer from fungus etching on internal lenses.

Otherwise a great lens.
__________________
Creation stands with neck outstretched....
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #16
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 947
I used to own the Elmarit 90 (v1 long version) and it gave super nice results (maybe a bit dull on C41), but I sold it because i was going for a 50mm mostly when shooting people.
Now I bought a elmar-c 90/4 because it's cheap and tiny.

Both can be bought around the same price when the elmar is in good or the elmarit is in bad shape. It's a matter of portability vs. one stop.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #17
ray*j*gun
Registered User
 
ray*j*gun's Avatar
 
ray*j*gun is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia area
Posts: 2,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by siracusa View Post
Without wishing to hijack your thread as you asked specifically about the j9, if you're looking for a reasonably priced portrait lens, have you considered the 9cm f4 Elmar in ltm mount? Outstanding value, an excellent portrait lens, and you won't run into the focusing problems that a J9 might well present (there are numerous posts about the focus issue with the J9 on rff, along with success stories such as johann's).
Plus 1 for the Elmar.... I have an uncoated version and its really excellent with all the character one could want. I also have the M version (coated of course) and its also excellent but does not have the OOF beauty of the LTM lens.
__________________
Raymond
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #18
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
 
mfunnell's Avatar
 
mfunnell is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,460
My favoured (relatively) inexpensive portrait lens is now a P C Nikkor 85mm/f2 in LTM which I picked up some time ago from a fellow RFFer for [mumble; I forget] small hundreds of dollars. I've under-used it, though, as I've seldom gone past my 75mm Summilux for such duties (that one can't be regarded as low cost!). However, the Summilux is spending time in the shop so the Nikkor has been getting exercise - and I've realised I have been ignoring a really good lens. I collected my Summilux the other day but suspect the Nikkor will now get more use than I've previously given it.

...Mike
__________________
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." Dave Barry

My flickr photostream has day-to-day stuff and I've given up most everywhere else through lack of time or perhaps interest.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #19
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
Hi,

But, the Jupiter is a pleasant lens to use and dirt cheap.

Why not buy one and then get it checked, cleaned of old lubricant etc and then just use it? My experience of Jupiters and my experience of repairs to lenses like the ones on my M2, IIIC and other pre-war ones, makes me suggest this course.

A Jupiter that's been checked and so on is a thing of beauty and a joy to use. And (again) it won't cost the earth to buy and check etc.

All the other lenses suggested will be old and second-hand as well. So you are taking a chance with them and paying more for just the same risk...

Regards, David

PS I've several ex-USSR lenses (meaning a dozen, at least) and have had no problems with them that I've not had on Leica's finest. Meaning both a Jupiter and Leica lens I own are/were a bit stiff to focus.

PPS (Edit) FWIW, I've had to scrap two Leica lenses as beyond repair. And I've had one cleaned due to haze. The charges for stripping down and testing the U/S Leitz ones were about double the charge for the cleaning the hazy one. The one that was cleaned cost about UKP 20: I've yet to scrap an ex-USSR lens or send one for repair...

FWIW (2), I think the main problem with ex-USSR lenses is that ham-fisted idiots who don't know a collimator from a colander think it is a simple matter to repair or restore them. They are happy to do this because they are cheap lenses and it won't matter if they wreck them, and they often do, and then sell them.

They don't mess around with Leica lenses as they cost serious money. The flaw in this logic is that the low cost of a lens doesn't make you a technical expert. Why they can't see this escapes me at the moment; worse still, they are allowed to vote and wooed by politicians...

Forums where people are told that they can do it easily at home have a lot to answer for, imo.
Dear David,

Seconded. I'd go for an 85/2 Jupiter over a 90/4 Elmar any day -- and I've had several of both.

Of course the ultimate answer is a Thambar 90/2.2 but alas "cheap" is not part of the equation: see http://www.shutterbug.com/content/le...-portrait-lens

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #20
shortstop
Registered User
 
shortstop's Avatar
 
shortstop is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 524
Excellent review, Roger Hicks.
I have a similar lens for 4x5: Rodenstock Imagon. Rarely used, I admit. the lightness of a leica with thambar would shoot more with a soft focus lens.
The price is the problem.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #21
JMQ
Registered User
 
JMQ is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 822
The 105/2.5 or 10.5cm f2.5 Nikkor in LTM. A little big and heavy, but the results are well documented. In fact, there is one for sale in the classifieds now (not affiliated with seller).
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #22
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,113
How about selling of two what you have, adding "J-9" money and getting Summicron DR?

50mm is the portrait range on 35mm RF and close up will give you heads with smooth bokeh.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #23
kshapero
Press the Shutter
 
kshapero's Avatar
 
kshapero is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida, USA
Age: 69
Posts: 9,729
I have the 9cm f4 Elmar in ltm mount and I love it, but I recently sprang for a Zeiss 85/4, waiting to see how that works out.
__________________
Akiva S.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kshapero

Cameras, Lenses and Photos
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #24
Platinum RF
Registered User
 
Platinum RF is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Dear David,
Of course the ultimate answer is a Thambar 90/2.2 but alas "cheap" is not part of the equation: see http://www.shutterbug.com/content/le...-portrait-lens

Cheers,

R.
Who need Thambar except collector? I can just put vaseline on any lens to achieve the result of Thambar.

For small size the later Canon 100 f3.5 is very light, Nikkor 105 f2.5 is excellent. They are cheap now. I have seem Nikkor 105 f2.5 LTM with shade case for less than $260 on evil bay.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #25
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Platinum RF View Post
Who need Thambar except collector? I can just put vaseline on any lens to achieve the result of Thambar.

For small size the later Canon 100 f3.5 is very light, Nikkor 105 f2.5 is excellent. They are cheap now. I have seem Nikkor 105 f2.5 LTM with shade case for less than $260 on evil bay.
No, you can't. The difference between Vaseline on the lens, and under-corrected spherical aberration, is very great indeed -- as you would know if you had tried it. Also,a purpose-build soft-focus lens gives repeatable results, unlike Vaseline. Read the review I linked to and you'll see that I didn't expect to be impressed by the Thambar, but I was.

All soft-focus lenses and screens give different effects -- I own or have owned maybe half a dozen, for a variety of formats -- and the cheapest way to get repeatable effects is with moulded glass soft-focus screens such as the Zeiss Softar or the "spider web" screen Kodak used to make.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #26
xxloverxx
Shoot.
 
xxloverxx is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 606
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray*j*gun View Post
Plus 1 for the Elmar.... I have an uncoated version and its really excellent with all the character one could want. I also have the M version (coated of course) and its also excellent but does not have the OOF beauty of the LTM lens.
+1 on the Elmar 90 —*I have the black LTM version from just before WW2 and, although I haven't done any portraits on it, I wouldn't hesitate to choose it. Got it for just under 100USD.
__________________
http://hugopoon.smugmug.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #27
45-Otto
Registered User
 
45-Otto is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 19
Another sleeper is the 85MM f2.8 Steinheil Culminar in LTM, used with a proper LTM/M series adaptor. No focus issues on either a Barnack or an M. These can be had rather inexpensively on the auction site and are nice low contrast and just sharp enough lenses for portraiture. Used wide open you can achieve nice separation from background objects.

Rd.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #28
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
 
filmtwit's Avatar
 
filmtwit is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Posts: 2,989
85mm Nikkor f2 in ltm. If I remember right it's also a sonnar.
__________________
Instgram
https://www.instagram.com/filmtwit/

The Flickr Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmtwit/

The Blog (Boring Sidney, Boring)
http://jeffthomasallen.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote

Oops...
Old 07-24-2014   #29
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,361
Oops...

Hi,

I forgot the second part of the question about Jupiters; what you have to watch for is the mount; they fitted a variety of cameras and the sellers don't always mention the mount or care. Plus the 39mm version came in SLR and RF versions for both Zenits and FEDs and Zorkis.

Another point that has to be made about the Jupiter 85mm f/2 lens is that it is not frighteningly sharp but just right for portraiture, especially of young and not so young ladies...

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #30
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,874
For cheap the 9cm f4 Elmar has a great signature. Mine was one of the M mount version, had a bit of a dent in the filter ring but was fun to use.

For a surprisingly medium price I've seen some Nikkor 105/2.5 ltm mount lenses that quite frankly will rock your world. Sub $300 for a good example IMHO is a bargain. I haven't seen any 85mm Nikkors out there in the past month but that's another great option.

Komura made some fine glass and when it's clean does a surprisingly good job.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #31
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
.....Plus the 39mm version came in SLR and RF versions for both Zenits and FEDs and Zorkis.
.....
Great point David! Focusing without a RF cam is, well, somewhat of a pain.

B2
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #32
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,362
The Elmar 9cm/4 and the Elmarit 90/2.8 come to mind, plus the inexpensive Steinheil Culminar 85/2.8 ($75). Another sleeper lens is the inexpensive and very sharp Canon 100/3.5 ltm ($125).
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

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

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

Old 07-24-2014   #33
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
 
Juan Valdenebro's Avatar
 
Juan Valdenebro is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Barcelona and Colombia
Age: 47
Posts: 4,354
Another option, with a bit more money but yet cheap, is a v2 90 summicron (M mount), the one that's big, with collapsible hood...
They're usually in the $600-$700 range, but from time to time KEH has one or two for around $300, bargain grade.
I bought one of those after seeing some very nice images done with that version, and I really like it for a portrait lens: one that's not for carrying everywhere or travelling, but for real, slow, enjoyable portraiture... For travelling or carrying constantly, a thinner / smaller f2.8 or f4 90 must be a better option, although not a better lens for portraits, because of selective focus possibilities and bokeh...
Cheers,
Juan
__________________
F i l m means fun!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2014   #34
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,180
Also checkout the 90f4 (Leica or Minolta) that were made for the Leica/Minolta CL and the Minolta CLE. U can usually find them at a reasonable price as well.

Gary
__________________
Panasonic LX100, Sigma Foveon, Fuji X and Panasonic CM1
  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 15:25.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.