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

Leica Screw Mount Copies Classic Leica Copy forum as listed in the book 300 Leica Copies, including but not limited to Nicca, Leotax, Honor, Canon etc. At one time there was a major part of the camera industry just trying to make a lower cost copy/dirivitive of the original Leica.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Lovely Pentax 43/1.9 Special in LTM mount
Old 11-26-2007   #1
Abbazz
6x9 and be there!
 
Abbazz's Avatar
 
Abbazz is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Karori (Aotearoa)
Posts: 787
Lovely Pentax 43/1.9 Special in LTM mount

I just saw this little gem on eBay: 150186529494



The 43/1.9 Limited lens is one of the sharpest lenses available in Pentax K mount. I'm craving to try this lens in Leica mount. Too bad it's so expensive

Cheers,

Abbazz
__________________
Il n'y a rien dans le monde qui n'ait son moment décisif, et le chef-d'œuvre de la bonne conduite est de connaître et de prendre ce moment. - Cardinal de Retz

The 6x9 Photography Online Resource

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2007   #2
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbazz
The 43/1.9 Limited lens is one of the sharpest lenses available in Pentax K mount. I'm craving to try this lens in Leica mount. Too bad it's so expensive...
With patience and alertness you may find one at reasonable cost. Or maybe you'll leap for that one on eBay?

I got this one from a Canadian forum member several years ago. A favorite with the Minolta CLE, though framing is tight. It's a brilliant lens, as expected, with just a whiff of barrel distortion.

__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-26-2007   #3
Kim Coxon
Moderator
 
Kim Coxon's Avatar
 
Kim Coxon is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 3,363
It is one of my favourite lenses!.



Kim
__________________
Hakuna Matata
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2007   #4
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,436
Kim, which framelines does it bring up on the Leica?

Ah - silly me - just realised it is a screw mount, so depends on which adapter you use!
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2007   #5
Kim Coxon
Moderator
 
Kim Coxon's Avatar
 
Kim Coxon is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 3,363
In some ways it is not a silly question. I have tried both a 50 and a 35 adapter and wasn't really that happy with either. It would be ideal on the R3 body or the CL. However, It was supplied with a superb 43/50 brightline finder with built in dopter correction. About 2 weekends ago I was out using it and was finding the finder much better than using either of the framelines in the M6. I then also started using the CV 28 brightline finder for the Elmarit and found that much better as well. The only trouble is that I feel a gas attack coming on and am looking very hard at a Bessa T body!.

Kim

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN
Kim, which framelines does it bring up on the Leica?

Ah - silly me - just realised it is a screw mount, so depends on which adapter you use!
__________________
Hakuna Matata
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2007   #6
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 4,302
The finder is very, very nice, but on the big side, especially mounted on a "Barnack," so I rarely use it. As w/my 40mm lenses, on an M body I usually use a 35/135 adapter & imagine tick marks inside the 35mm frames (like the 75mm corners inside the 50mm frames on a modern M) or frame loosely using the 50mm frames (not that bad, even on the modern M's w/their undersized @ infinity 50mm frames).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kim Coxon
In some ways it is not a silly question. I have tried both a 50 and a 35 adapter and wasn't really that happy with either. It would be ideal on the R3 body or the CL. However, It was supplied with a superb 43/50 brightline finder with built in dopter correction. About 2 weekends ago I was out using it and was finding the finder much better than using either of the framelines in the M6. I then also started using the CV 28 brightline finder for the Elmarit and found that much better as well. The only trouble is that I feel a gas attack coming on and am looking very hard at a Bessa T body!.

Kim
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram

Last edited by furcafe : 11-27-2007 at 23:51.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2007   #7
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,289
This is indeed a great lens. I had one for the summer, and shot quite a bit with it, and was quite surprised by it. Raid also has good things to say about this not so little gem.

Handling is tops as well.

I had mine bring up the 50 framelines, but used the finder that came with it for framing, the supplied VF has both 43 & 50mm framelines.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2007   #8
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,436
Another question for you Kim - have you compared it with the 43/1.9 Limited in K mount? Is it the same formula?
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2007   #9
Kim Coxon
Moderator
 
Kim Coxon's Avatar
 
Kim Coxon is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 3,363
Yup! If I get a chance, I can do some side by side shots if you want.

Kim

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN
Another question for you Kim - have you compared it with the 43/1.9 Limited in K mount? Is it the same formula?
__________________
Hakuna Matata
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-27-2007   #10
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,436
Yes please! How about some side-by-side with the same film, and just to make it interesting, some with the K10D. You don't have a digital rangefinder body too? I know the crop will be different, but I'd like to see what you make of it. For the film shots, B&W or colour?
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2007   #11
Sonnar2
Registered User
 
Sonnar2's Avatar
 
Sonnar2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Germany
Age: 53
Posts: 1,409
The lens is looong, so it was also my suggestion that it's the SLR lens design. Just amazing that PENTAX never made any Rangefinder lens in history, except this one... For my feel it's a bit too long, so it wasn't my choice and I choosed to buy a UC-Hexanon 35/2 recently. Anyway I'm more familiar with the 35mm than the 40mm focal length (my Rollei 40/2.8 in LTM). But whoever need a 43mm in between to the 50mm??
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2007   #12
Kim Coxon
Moderator
 
Kim Coxon's Avatar
 
Kim Coxon is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 3,363
I will see what I can do. It may take a week or two as things are rather hectic at the moment. I may just have a dSLR body. (or 3 )

Kim

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN
Yes please! How about some side-by-side with the same film, and just to make it interesting, some with the K10D. You don't have a digital rangefinder body too? I know the crop will be different, but I'd like to see what you make of it. For the film shots, B&W or colour?
__________________
Hakuna Matata
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2007   #13
Kim Coxon
Moderator
 
Kim Coxon's Avatar
 
Kim Coxon is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 3,363
I was quite surprised with the lens both in LTM and SLR format. It is not that useful on the dSLRs with the crop factor being around the equivalent of 65mm, too long for a "standard" and a bit short for a "portrait". However, with the SLR, it makes a very good pairing with the 31Ltd. With the M6, I find it a very useful combo with 25, 43 and 75. Otherwise, I would go for 28, 50 and 90.

As to the size, it feels about the same as the 50 Cron and if anything is slightly smaller than the 50 Nokton. In SLR terms, it is a very compact lens verging on being a pancake.

Kim

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonnar2
The lens is looong, so it was also my suggestion that it's the SLR lens design. Just amazing that PENTAX never made any Rangefinder lens in history, except this one... For my feel it's a bit too long, so it wasn't my choice and I choosed to buy a UC-Hexanon 35/2 recently. Anyway I'm more familiar with the 35mm than the 40mm focal length (my Rollei 40/2.8 in LTM). But whoever need a 43mm in between to the 50mm??
__________________
Hakuna Matata
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-28-2007   #14
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,436
Yes, 43 is an odd length for the dSLR, which is why I've never chased one. I do have the DA40 pancake, and even it is an odd length with the 1.5 crop, a long normal rather than a short telephoto. I like it on the DS; makes a very compact package.
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2007   #15
Finn
Registered User
 
Finn is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN
Yes, 43 is an odd length for the dSLR, which is why I've never chased one. I do have the DA40 pancake, and even it is an odd length with the 1.5 crop, a long normal rather than a short telephoto. I like it on the DS; makes a very compact package.
Delurking to mention that the 43 is a great lens on a film body, but yes, it is odd on digital. I really really want to like it on the K100D, but it is a little odd. I use it on an old MX, and THAT is a great combo. When I want a compact SLR, that's the body/lens combo I reach for. Of course, that's the whole idea of a RF...

I would love to try the LTM version.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2007   #16
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,289
Isn't the 43 in K mount an ASPH? My LTM version never said ASPH on it, only Special.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2007   #17
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb
Isn't the 43 in K mount an ASPH? My LTM version never said ASPH on it, only Special.
Pentax's terminology for an Aspheric lens is "AL"... as in SMC Pentax-FA 1:1.8 31mm AL Limited. I believe this and the SMC Pentax-DA 1:3.2 21mm AL Limited are the only two of the Limited series that bear the AL label.

There are several other AL lenses but some knowledgeable folks say that Pentax has quietly used aspheric surfaces in some lenses without mentioning it. So it's entirely possible the 43mm has one or more aspheric surfaces, though Pentax doesn't claim it. As far as I can tell, the glass is the same in the K mount and L mount 43mm lenses, the difference being just the lens barrels.

Also, the L lens has 9 diaphragm blades while the K lens has 8. I measure the L lens at 46.8mm long from mounting surface to filter ring.
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2007   #18
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,436
Finn - greetings and welcome to the forum. Glad we have drawn you out of lurking! I sometimes use my DA40 pancake on a MZ-5 body - that is very light and compact, moreso than Leica M4 with 35/2 Summicron.

Doug - I wonder about the extra blade in the iris. I suspect that has more to do with pandering to the perceived desires of the specialist Japanese market than any practical effect on image quality.
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-02-2008   #19
Hacker
黑客
 
Hacker's Avatar
 
Hacker is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 963
Does anyone know the filter size of the Pentax 43mm LTM lens?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-02-2008   #20
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
 
Gabriel M.A.'s Avatar
 
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,992
Stay away from me, you tempter. I heeeeed yo to ree-pent. Hallebooya.

Ah shal not fall into temptashon, ow-lowd. Ah shal not!
__________________
Big wig wisdom: "Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?" --Harry Warner, of Warner Bros., 1927

Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).


My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-02-2008   #21
Hacker
黑客
 
Hacker's Avatar
 
Hacker is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 963
Resistance is futile. What is the thread size for the filter?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-02-2008   #22
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hacker
Does anyone know the filter size of the Pentax 43mm LTM lens?
49mm, a common and traditional Pentax size. You're going to love it...

Edit: 49mm for the SLR version, 40.5mm for the LTM version.
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook

Last edited by Doug : 02-04-2008 at 21:07.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-02-2008   #23
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN
Doug - I wonder about the extra blade in the iris. I suspect that has more to do with pandering to the perceived desires of the specialist Japanese market than any practical effect on image quality.
Back to Chris's comment... It's been my observation that good SLR lenses tend to have fewer diaphragm blades than good RF lenses. And I believe this due to weight/inertia reasons. The SLR blades are spring-loaded to snap back when released, as of course they close down and reopen each exposure. Total weight of the blades would slow response and more blades also add friction. This of course is not an issue for RF lenses.
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-02-2008   #24
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 4,302
Don't know about the SLR version, but the LTM has a 40.5mm filter thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hacker
Does anyone know the filter size of the Pentax 43mm LTM lens?
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-02-2008   #25
Hacker
黑客
 
Hacker's Avatar
 
Hacker is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 963
I'm confused: 40.5mm or 49mm for the filter diameter for LTM?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-03-2008   #26
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hacker
I'm confused: 40.5mm or 49mm for the filter diameter for LTM?
Sorry, misread your question! Threaded for 40.5mm filters for the Leica-mount L Special, and 49mm for the FA mount Limited.
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-03-2008   #27
Hacker
黑客
 
Hacker's Avatar
 
Hacker is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug
Sorry, misread your question! Threaded for 40.5mm filters for the Leica-mount L Special, and 49mm for the FA mount Limited.
Got it, thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-03-2008   #28
Captain
Registered User
 
Captain is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 265
It looks a big lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-03-2008   #29
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,289
40.5 is correct I believe. It is not 49mm. I had this lens for a while, and interestingly the Rollei 80/2.8 Hacker, they are both wonderful.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-03-2008   #30
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,587
Bob allowed me to try out his Pentax 43mm lens. I took two rolls of film with it, and I took another roll with the Summicron-c 40mm/2 for comparison purposes. Both lenses did extremely well. There was no clear superiority of the Pentax lens over the less expensive Summicron-C. Bob may have commented once about it.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

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

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

Old 02-03-2008   #31
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,587
Some photos with the 43mm:

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706348

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706340

http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706382


http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6706381

a roll of film: http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=788521
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

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

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

Old 02-04-2008   #32
Hacker
黑客
 
Hacker's Avatar
 
Hacker is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid
Bob allowed me to try out his Pentax 43mm lens. I took two rolls of film with it, and I took another roll with the Summicron-c 40mm/2 for comparison purposes. Both lenses did extremely well. There was no clear superiority of the Pentax lens over the less expensive Summicron-C. Bob may have commented once about it.
Raid, what about flare? Isn't the Cron 40mm uncoated?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-04-2008   #33
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,289
My 40/2.0 was coated if I'm remembering correctly. We're talking 70's, so some coating must have been on there by then.

I didn't see surprising flare with either the 43 or the 40, and I shot the Pentax a lot in late day light.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-04-2008   #34
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,587
The Summicron is coated, so there were no problems with flare.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

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

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

Old 02-04-2008   #35
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,860
most lenses made after WW 2 were coated.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-05-2008   #36
Hacker
黑客
 
Hacker's Avatar
 
Hacker is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 963
Sorry to ask another stupid question. Is the 40 Cron single coated then vs the Pentax multicoating?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-05-2008   #37
Sonnar2
Registered User
 
Sonnar2's Avatar
 
Sonnar2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Germany
Age: 53
Posts: 1,409
Someone dig out a lens diagram of the Pentax 43/1.9?
7/6 reads like a Gaussian type, but could be a retrofocus too because of its length!

have fun, Frank
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-05-2008   #38
furcafe
Registered User
 
furcafe's Avatar
 
furcafe is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 4,302
According to Mr. Gandy, "[c]ontrary to some claims, best evidence indicates [the 40/2 Summicron] was not a multicoated lens, unlike the later 40/2 Rokkor for the CLE."

http://www.cameraquest.com/mlenses.htm


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hacker
Sorry to ask another stupid question. Is the 40 Cron single coated then vs the Pentax multicoating?
__________________
Five a Second. Chicago's Bell & Howell Co. (cameras) announced that it would put on sale this fall the world's most expensive still camera. Its "Foton" will take five 35-mm. pictures a second, sell for $700. Bell & Howell, which has found that "families of both low and high incomes now spend over $550" for movie equipment, hopes to sell 20,000 Fotons a year.
--Facts And Figures, Time magazine, Monday, October 4, 1948
My Photoblog

My Flickr stream

My RFF Gallery

My Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-05-2008   #39
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 8,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonnar2
Someone dig out a lens diagram of the Pentax 43/1.9?
7/6 reads like a Gaussian type, but could be a retrofocus too because of its length!

have fun, Frank
We'd need someone from Japan, Pentax USA had zero idea what I was talking about when I tried to get anything about this lens. I was told that Pentax had never made such a lens.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-05-2008   #40
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonnar2
Someone dig out a lens diagram of the Pentax 43/1.9?
7/6 reads like a Gaussian type, but could be a retrofocus too because of its length!
Looks like a Planar (SLR type) relative to me...

I believe the L Special in the ltm mount was not marketed in the US; not so surprising then that Pentax USA didn't know about it.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Pentax 43f1.9 diagram.jpg (5.0 KB, 610 views)
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook

Last edited by Doug : 02-05-2008 at 12:46.
  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 02:14.


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.