Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-30-2018, 03:56 PM   #16
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Arjeplog
Posts: 82
no fan so far of mirrorless, not sure that will change at some point- maybe just when there's no other choice left....

07-30-2018, 04:08 PM   #17
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 186
i really don't care what camera I use, as long as I can get it within a reasonable price for the body and have good lens compatibility. Rest of it is just a slight learning curve to move from EVF to mirrorless. That said, I prefer using FF cameras, the weight doesn't really bother me and I love the handling on these much better. You could never have a proper handling on the camera if you have a 70-200 2.8 body with VR. You'd have to hold the lens and that would not be ideal for me..
07-30-2018, 04:10 PM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,309
I don't mind either type of camera honestly. I happily used my MFT kit when I had it, now I'm using a DSLR kit and I'm happy with it too. In terms of pure tech innovation, I think mirrorless is probably easier to work with and has larger future potential. But, how long would that take, and would result be significantly better than the same generation DSLR? In terms of weight - when I just got the K-1, I never thought it'd be a big deal. But after taking my kit to few cities and outings, I bought a GR2 to have a light option for casual photography.
07-30-2018, 04:18 PM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,036
My speculation; they will have a surprise for their 100 birthday?
I want a FF but not a heavy one. and it doesn't have to be a mirrorless.

"If they can stick a FF sensor and the shake reduction in side a K3 body size, cut all the un-necessary things", (may be a wifi unit in there? ) I will be more than happy to abandon my FF mirrorless dream.

I don't mind mirrorless at all. I like the idea that I can digital zoom-in in the viewfinder to check my focus before shoot. The real real problem for me is the size and weight of FF body. but If I get the give away K1, I will use it!


Last edited by pakinjapan; 07-30-2018 at 04:29 PM.
07-30-2018, 05:12 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,443
QuoteOriginally posted by DeadJohn Quote
Conjecture on one possible full frame future: In 10 years
All humans will have the option of the BEC(bionic eye camera).Inserted easily, it takes a shot with a blink of the natural eye thats programmed by the mandatory micro chip thats inserted in all humans(as per the laws of the ruling AI Robots that control everything on earth).

Humans only have to sit in front of a laptop screen and all captured images are automatically transferred.
03-06-2019, 12:09 PM   #21
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 34
I was wondering how much weight I could save just on my main walkaround if I went to mirrorless, without sacrificing sensor size. I have a K-5 II and a Tamron 17-50/2.8. 760g + 430g = 1190g. But I like the KP and plan to upgrade to it when used prices come down below US$500. That would be 703g + 430g = 1133g.

So I searched BHPhoto for APS-C mirrorless system medium zoom f/2.8 lenses. There was exactly one -- the Fujifilm 16-55/2.8. I was pleased to see it's weathersealed; the Tamron is not (when it's raining I put on the Pentax 18-135). But the weight is 655g. Hm. That means that the body would need to be significantly lighter than 1133g - 655g = 478g for that switch to make sense. It's $900, about what I paid for the Tamron and the Pentax 18-135 together, and the Tamron has come down in price since then.

So I searched again for what Mirrorless APS-C bodies Fujifilm offers. The X-E3 is lightest at 327g. At first I was going to pass on it for not having an EVF, but then I learned it does in fact have an EVF. Total weight 327g + 655g = 982g, a savings of 151g or about 13.3%.

That isn't really a compelling amount of weight savings. And it would cost $700 + $900, a lot more than I paid for the K-5 II + the Tamron.

I'm not familiar with Fujifilm body offerings; would I be sacrificing anything I value by going to the X-E3? I put them through DPReview's comparison tool. Hm, I'm surprised to see that the X-E3 doesn't have image stabilization. But that isn't terribly important to me because subject motion is usually my limiter. No TAv mode nor sensitivity priority, but I usually use aperture priority. But wait, it's not weather-sealed?!? That's a deal breaker.

So I looked again, this time filtering on weather-sealing. The X-T3 is 440g and $1,299. That's a savings of only 38g, or 3.4%. I'm not sure I'd notice the difference. And still no image stabilization. And viewfinder magnification is only 0.77x. There would be advantages, of course; especially better video. But overall I'm not sure I'd make that switch even if I could do it for free, and I certainly don't want to pay $1,200 + $900 for that.

So to reduce weight when I want to, I'm thinking of adding the 52g Pentax 40mm XS. Long-term, maybe the 119g 21mm and the 130g 70mm; keeping one of them in a pocket would keep it's weight off my shoulder. Other options, which I already have, are the 195g FA 35/2 and the 180g F 28/2.8.

Alternatively, the Fujifilm X-E3 and the 78g 27/2.8 (and still using the Pentax w/18-135 when it's raining). At $450 for that lens, the total would be $1,150. At 327g + 78g = 405g compared to 703g + 52g = 755g, that's a savings of 350g or 46.4%. And it would have the advantage of better video than the Pentax. But I don't want to pay $1,150.

The older X-E1 is 350g, still a weight savings of 43.3%. I see the X-E1 can be had for under $200 in good condition, and the 27/2.8 used in good condition for under $200, so total under $400.

Sony has the APS-C a5100 which is only 283g. The 69g 20mm pancake is wide for walkaround and doesn't get great marks for image quality, but the 140g Sigma 30/2.8 sounds good, for a total weight of 423g. That's a bit heavier than the X-E1 with the 27/2.8, and with more menu-diving. So I'll pass on Sony.

Another option for a high-quality lightweight walkaround would be the Sony RX100, Mark III, IV, V, or VA. Their weights are 290g - 299g. But even the old Mark III is running nearly as much as an X-E1 plus a 27/2.8. For a 1" sensor compared to the X-E1's APS-C sensor.

So maybe there's an X-E1 and 27/2.8 in my future. But at around $100 used in good condition, I'll probably go to the Pentax 40mm XS first.

UPDATE:

For now, I've brought my old F 28/2.8 out of semi-retirement. With collapsible rubber hood. I used to use a Leica MiniLux with 40mm lens; the focal length worked well for me and 28mm on APS-C is similar. I'm going to leave the 28mm on the K-5 II for general walkaround for a while and see how it goes. 250g less than the Tamron 17-50/2.8, on the K-5 II it's 21% less weight total.

Last edited by GregL65; 03-09-2019 at 12:21 PM.
03-08-2019, 09:00 AM   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,286
QuoteOriginally posted by GregL65 Quote
I was wondering how much weight I could save just on my main walkaround if I went to mirrorless, without sacrificing sensor size. I have a K-5 II and a Tamron 17-50/2.8. 760g + 430g = 1190g. But I like the KP and plan to upgrade to it when prices used priced come down below US$500. That would be 703g + 430g = 1133g.

So I searched BHPhoto for APS-C mirrorless system medium zoom f/2.8 lenses. There was exactly one -- the Fujifilm 16-55/2.8. I was pleased to see it's weathersealed; the Tamron is not (when it's raining I put on the Pentax 18-135). But the weight is 655g. Hm. That means that the body would need to be significantly lighter than 1133g - 655g = 478g for that switch to make sense. It's $900, about what I paid for the Tamron and the Pentax 18-135 together, and the Tamron has come down in price since then.

So I searched again for what Mirrorless APS-C bodies Fujifilm offers. The X-E3 is lightest at 327g. At first I was going to pass on it for not having an EVF, but then I learned it does in fact have an EVF. Total weight 327g + 655g = 982g, a savings of 151g or about 13.3%.

That isn't really a compelling amount of weight savings. And it would cost $700 + $900, a lot more than I paid for the K-5 II + the Tamron.

I'm not familiar with Fujifilm body offerings; would I be sacrificing anything I value by going to the X-E3? I put them through DPReview's comparison tool. Hm, I'm surprised to see that the X-E3 doesn't have image stabilization. But that isn't terribly important to me because subject motion is usually my limiter. No TAv mode nor sensitivity priority, but I usually use aperture priority. But wait, it's not weather-sealed?!? That's a deal breaker.

So I looked again, this time filtering on weather-sealing. The X-T3 is 440g and $1,299. That's a savings of only 38g, or 3.4%. I'm not sure I'd notice the difference. And still no image stabilization. And viewfinder magnification is only 0.77x. There would be advantages, of course; especially better video. But overall I'm not sure I'd make that switch even if I could do it for free, and I certainly don't want to pay $1,200 + $900 for that.

So to reduce weight when I want to, I'm thinking of adding the 52g Pentax 40mm XS. Long-term, maybe the 119g 21mm and the 130g 70mm; keeping one of them in a pocket would keep it's weight off my shoulder. Other options, which I already have, are the 195g FA 35/2 and the 180g F 28/2.8.

Alternatively, the Fujifilm X-E3 and the 78g 27/2.8 (and still using the Pentax w/18-135 when it's raining). At $450 for that lens, the total would be $1,150. At 327g + 78g = 405g compared to 703g + 52g = 755g, that's a savings of 350g or 46.4%. And it would have the advantage of better video than the Pentax. But I don't want to pay $1,150.

The older X-E1 is 350g, still a weight savings of 43.3%. I see the X-E1 can be had for under $200 in good condition, and the 27/2.8 used in good condition for under $200, so total under $400.

Sony has the APS-C a5100 which is only 283g. The 69g 20mm pancake is wide for walkaround and doesn't get great marks for image quality, but the 140g Sigma 30/2.8 sounds good, for a total weight of 423g. That's a bit heavier than the X-E1 with the 27/2.8, and with more menu-diving. So I'll pass on Sony.

Another option for a high-quality lightweight walkaround would be the Sony RX100, Mark III, IV, V, or VA. Their weights are 290g - 299g. But even the old Mark III is running nearly as much as an X-E1 plus a 27/2.8. For a 1" sensor compared to the X-E1's APS-C sensor.

So maybe there's an X-E1 and 27/2.8 in my future. But at around $100 used in good condition, I'll probably go to the Pentax 40mm XS first.

UPDATE:

For now, I've brought my old F 28/2.8 out of semi-retirement. With collapsible rubber hood. I used to use a Leica MiniLux with 40mm lens; the focal length worked well for me and 28mm on APS-C is similar. I'm going to leave the 28mm on the K-5 II for general walkaround for a while and see how it goes. 250g less than the Tamron 17-50/2.8, on the K-5 II it's 21% less weight total.
To me, size is as important as weight. I love a limited like the 40mm on my K-3ii. I can just barely fit that into a coat pocket, but it's not truly pocketable. One of the reasons I'm interested in a future mirrorless would be so that I have a pocketable option, that also has the flexibility of larger lenses when necessary. It would be nice to have a high-quality camera with flexible lens selections but not always have to carry a backpack and a BlackRapid sling.

Look at this comparison. I know a lot of people get caught up in ergonomics and how they need a larger camera for comfortable shooting, but Ricoh GRs sell pretty well. I used a Canon Elph for 10 years and never once thought I wanted a much larger body.
03-08-2019, 03:53 PM   #23
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 13,647
QuoteOriginally posted by GregL65 Quote
I was wondering how much weight I could save just on my main walkaround if I went to mirrorless, without sacrificing sensor size. I have a K-5 II and a Tamron 17-50/2.8. 760g + 430g = 1190g. But I like the KP and plan to upgrade to it when prices used priced come down below US$500. That would be 703g + 430g = 1133g.

So I searched BHPhoto for APS-C mirrorless system medium zoom f/2.8 lenses. There was exactly one -- the Fujifilm 16-55/2.8. I was pleased to see it's weathersealed; the Tamron is not (when it's raining I put on the Pentax 18-135). But the weight is 655g. Hm. That means that the body would need to be significantly lighter than 1133g - 655g = 478g for that switch to make sense. It's $900, about what I paid for the Tamron and the Pentax 18-135 together, and the Tamron has come down in price since then.

So I searched again for what Mirrorless APS-C bodies Fujifilm offers. The X-E3 is lightest at 327g. At first I was going to pass on it for not having an EVF, but then I learned it does in fact have an EVF. Total weight 327g + 655g = 982g, a savings of 151g or about 13.3%.

That isn't really a compelling amount of weight savings. And it would cost $700 + $900, a lot more than I paid for the K-5 II + the Tamron.

I'm not familiar with Fujifilm body offerings; would I be sacrificing anything I value by going to the X-E3? I put them through DPReview's comparison tool. Hm, I'm surprised to see that the X-E3 doesn't have image stabilization. But that isn't terribly important to me because subject motion is usually my limiter. No TAv mode nor sensitivity priority, but I usually use aperture priority. But wait, it's not weather-sealed?!? That's a deal breaker.

So I looked again, this time filtering on weather-sealing. The X-T3 is 440g and $1,299. That's a savings of only 38g, or 3.4%. I'm not sure I'd notice the difference. And still no image stabilization. And viewfinder magnification is only 0.77x. There would be advantages, of course; especially better video. But overall I'm not sure I'd make that switch even if I could do it for free, and I certainly don't want to pay $1,200 + $900 for that.

So to reduce weight when I want to, I'm thinking of adding the 52g Pentax 40mm XS. Long-term, maybe the 119g 21mm and the 130g 70mm; keeping one of them in a pocket would keep it's weight off my shoulder. Other options, which I already have, are the 195g FA 35/2 and the 180g F 28/2.8.

Alternatively, the Fujifilm X-E3 and the 78g 27/2.8 (and still using the Pentax w/18-135 when it's raining). At $450 for that lens, the total would be $1,150. At 327g + 78g = 405g compared to 703g + 52g = 755g, that's a savings of 350g or 46.4%. And it would have the advantage of better video than the Pentax. But I don't want to pay $1,150.

The older X-E1 is 350g, still a weight savings of 43.3%. I see the X-E1 can be had for under $200 in good condition, and the 27/2.8 used in good condition for under $200, so total under $400.

Sony has the APS-C a5100 which is only 283g. The 69g 20mm pancake is wide for walkaround and doesn't get great marks for image quality, but the 140g Sigma 30/2.8 sounds good, for a total weight of 423g. That's a bit heavier than the X-E1 with the 27/2.8, and with more menu-diving. So I'll pass on Sony.

Another option for a high-quality lightweight walkaround would be the Sony RX100, Mark III, IV, V, or VA. Their weights are 290g - 299g. But even the old Mark III is running nearly as much as an X-E1 plus a 27/2.8. For a 1" sensor compared to the X-E1's APS-C sensor.

So maybe there's an X-E1 and 27/2.8 in my future. But at around $100 used in good condition, I'll probably go to the Pentax 40mm XS first.

UPDATE:

For now, I've brought my old F 28/2.8 out of semi-retirement. With collapsible rubber hood. I used to use a Leica MiniLux with 40mm lens; the focal length worked well for me and 28mm on APS-C is similar. I'm going to leave the 28mm on the K-5 II for general walkaround for a while and see how it goes. 250g less than the Tamron 17-50/2.8, on the K-5 II it's 21% less weight total.
Yeah, savings in cost and weight can be marginal.

If you walkaround with a KP and the DA21 and DA40 pancakes that does most of what your current combo does.





03-08-2019, 10:54 PM   #24
mee
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,808
I want the Samsung NX2 in K mount. 28 to 30 MP sensor with a dual pixel autofocus system, Exynos 9810 processor allowing for 4k at 120fps, 15 fps mechanical shutter, and way more electronic..

Of course this was vague rumor on a third rate site for a camera that never was released before Samsung nuked the entire lineup. But I like the idea of Ricoh buying rights and parts and making a mirrorless crop with it. Both video and autofocus issues would likely be resolved.

If they bought rights to that Samsung 16-50mm f/2.0-2.8 variable lens as well, it would make a nice kit that wouldn't take a whole lot of work to launch (versus ground up).
03-09-2019, 05:12 AM - 1 Like   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,461
QuoteOriginally posted by 08amczb Quote
So where is the mirrorless future proof ... camera (or at least development)?
Look at Olympus and Panasonic. There you have your "future proof" cameras.

Look at sales of any sort of ILC. It is a dying type of device. Watch Nikon, Sony, Canon, Fuji struggle.


As a photographer and not a nerd I do not care too much about "mirrorless" or not, I care about ergonomics, joy of use, image quality versus price point - all together is : quality.

The makers have a totally different view on it and their interests are not mine, often quite the contrary.

As a happy consumer and not just a paid service provider I can be totally relaxed for years to come. If they all fold, then that is it.
03-13-2019, 07:44 AM - 1 Like   #26
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,318
QuoteOriginally posted by donpjt Quote
i really don't care what camera I use, as long as I can get it within a reasonable price for the body and have good lens compatibility. Rest of it is just a slight learning curve to move from EVF to mirrorless. That said, I prefer using FF cameras, the weight doesn't really bother me and I love the handling on these much better. You could never have a proper handling on the camera if you have a 70-200 2.8 body with VR.You'd have to hold the lens and that would not be ideal for me.
That is how I learned to hold a camera 50 years ago, and how I hold one today. {I'm not sure what 'VR' has to do with this, but IBIS makes handling the camera so much easier}
03-13-2019, 08:14 AM   #27
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 34,422
I really can't discuss this with people who don't understand that many have an aesthetic preference for DSLRs.

QuoteQuote:
No need for separate AF and AE sensors, the main sensor can do all of this.
I don't care. It;'s inside the camera.

QuoteQuote:
No need for AF adjustment, the main sensor always can check it with contrast detection.
I've needed to do an AF adjustment with one non-Pentax lens in 10 years. A non stater over here. With 3 bodies an 20 lenses, this IMHO is not a selling point for a camera.

QuoteQuote:
It's lighter, the prism is big and heavy.
If you're a 120 pound weakling that's a big consideration.

QuoteQuote:
Shutter lag can be totally eliminated. If the (future) sensor captures continuously, then the camera can save the image taken when you pushed the button or even before you pushed the shutter button.
If and only if. if pigs could fly we'd have to spend a lot more time looking up.

QuoteQuote:
Any custom overlay can be added to the viewfinder image. Focus peaking, histogram, under/overexposure warnings..
.

To much info. I like what I have. I even hate it when the histogram obscures the bottom half of the image when chimping.

QuoteQuote:
Exposeur can be simulated. (I like it when I half press the shutter button)
Unless you're going to a 27 inch monitor you can't even tell what's in focus on those little EVF screens.
You do understand every Pentax has a backcreen that shows you what's in focus and can show under and over exposed area. Available on an OVF when needed. Where as an EVF doesn't have an OVF when needed.

QuoteQuote:
Low light manual focus is easier with "correct exposure" viewfinder image
Unless things have changed in the years since I last looked through one, low light performance of an EVF is truly appalling compared to an OVF.

To, me, you're selling cool aid, and I'm not buying.

I'm not sure why EVF and mirrorless proponents feel the necessity to compare to DSLRs. I guess when you're top dog, every one wants to compare what they have to what you have. For some reason, I have never felt the urge to go on an anti-mirrorless speculation. Yet we see this kind of pro mirrorless anti DSLR stuff all the time. I'd have no problem with pro-mirrorless, I don't see the point in claiming it's better than DSLRs, if the one thing DSLR users care about is not having to view the nature they are experiencing on an electronic screen. Reality is preferable to me.

Nothing a mirrorless proponent says will ever overcome that one limitation. To be dominant, the new system has to be better at everything. That's never going to happen. If the thing you care about is for you the most important part of your photographic experience, the bells and whistles are unimportant.

IMHO mirrorless is all bells and whistles.

Last edited by normhead; 03-13-2019 at 08:32 AM.
03-13-2019, 08:30 AM   #28
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,318
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I really can't discuss this with people who don't understand that many have an aesthetic preference for DSLRs.
I do understand your preference. I do wish that you could understand my preference. A hybrid viewfinder could satisfy both of us.
QuoteQuote:
Shutter lag can be totally eliminated. If the (future) sensor captures continuously, then the camera can save the image taken when you pushed the button or even before you pushed the shutter button.
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
If and only if. if pigs could fly we'd have to spend a lot more time looking up.
Some smart phones have this capability already. It would be a real blessing for someone with my reflexes. On multiple occasions i have had my camera trained on a bird waiting for it to take off, not knowing whether it will leave now or three minutes from now. Yes, if I were using a camera with a deeper buffer, I could start a burst and hope that it took off sometime during that burst - but with my luck, it would probably take off just after my buffer filled, no matter how deep the buffer was. With the type of "circular queue" described in the words you quoted, the camera would store images recorded even before my slow reflexes pushed the shutter button, and might actually catch the moment that caused me to react. To me this has a genuine practical use - it is not a bell or whistle.
03-13-2019, 09:02 AM   #29
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,286
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
To me this has a genuine practical use - it is not a bell or whistle.
Almost all the features in any camera beyond pushing the shutter and having a basic image recorded are part of a big gray area where personal preference defines what's a must-have and what's a superfluous bell/whistle. We often see pixel shift and astrotracer and composition adjust defended as necessary and innovative features, while EVF and pre-buffering are decried as inferior solutions or wastes of resources. Tough, weather-sealed cameras are a must have, unless you're looking for an APS-C prime... then that's not that important.

Many here at Pentax Forums have chosen to draw their line in the sand at the feature level their current Pentax camera and lenses have. And many or most of them will move that line when the next Pentax body is released.
03-13-2019, 09:03 AM   #30
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,073
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I do understand your preference. I do wish that you could understand my preference. A hybrid viewfinder could satisfy both of us.
Exactly!

A hybrid VF brings the best of both DSLR and MILC worlds with 1) the aesthetics, eye-friendliness, energy-savings, and noise(heat)-avoiding properties of an OVF with 2) the digital-preview/review, image enhancement, overlays, and blinkie/sparklie feedback on exposure and focus of an EVF. I'd love to be able to use an OVF for composition and shooting but get to see a quick digital review of each shot without taking my eye from the view finder. I'd only use full MILC-mode sporadically.

Sure, a DSLR with a hybrid VF might be more complex and expensive, but I'm looking for the best camera, not the cheapest camera I can find.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
button, development, digital camera, dslrs, evf, future, image, kp, lens, lenses, mirrorless, nikon, pentax, people, sensor, sensor technology, shutter, sony, switch, tech, times
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speculations on the new D-Fa large diameter standard zoom Stavri Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 58 09-26-2015 05:58 AM
K-7 Speculations (moved over from review section) sctybear Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 05-07-2010 05:48 PM
K30D/K300D speculations and new lenses ogl Pentax News and Rumors 355 01-24-2009 11:49 PM
Suggestion: "Speculations on the Future" forum mattdm Site Suggestions and Help 3 10-19-2007 10:54 AM
Your Speculations? (on the Hoya-Pentax Issue) RiceHigh Pentax News and Rumors 37 06-16-2007 03:08 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:47 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top