1992 M5?
Old 4 Weeks Ago   #1
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,573
1992 M5?

Anyone have one? Any info? After 15 years another small batch of M5s were made? Really?
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #2
ckuwajima
Celso
 
ckuwajima is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: São Paulo, SP - Brazil
Age: 59
Posts: 88
According to Leica Wiki, there were 20 M5 manufactured in 1992!
https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica...n/index.php/M5
__________________
Celso
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #3
BLKRCAT
100% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,412
Interesting. I didnt know that leica did this small run in '92 of t he M5. I'm sure none of them are out in shooting circulation. Likely on a shelf to remain in untouched condition for years.
__________________
TumblrYoutube
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #4
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 40
Posts: 3,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
I'm sure none of them are out in shooting circulation. Likely on a shelf to remain in untouched condition for years.
That's sad. They will never be more valuable than as a camera. They probably are just going to go from one safe or shelf to another, bartered on some perceived value and all the while, dry up, cake become maladjusted and otherwise die. They might as well be M5 shells filled with bits to make them weigh as much as a real camera.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #5
BLKRCAT
100% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,412
Whatever happened to that rumor that Leica was making new viewfinders/rangefinders for the M5?
__________________
TumblrYoutube
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #6
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
Whatever happened to that rumor that Leica was making new viewfinders/rangefinders for the M5?
why? DAG or Sherry can install a MP viewfinder.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #7
Robert Lai
Registered User
 
Robert Lai is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,318
An MP viewfinder won't have those circular marks to indicate the exact metering area for the 50mm lens.

Also, would the meter display still work if you replace the viewfinder to the MP version? I guess it should, if it was projected into the viewfinder.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #8
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Lai View Post
An MP viewfinder won't have those circular marks to indicate the exact metering area for the 50mm lens.

Also, would the meter display still work if you replace the viewfinder to the MP version? I guess it should, if it was projected into the viewfinder.
The MP finder has the missing prism for less image ghosting.

yes, the meter works.

I have one, finder replacement done by Sherry.

Stephen
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #9
Flat Twin
Film Shooter
 
Flat Twin is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oxford, U.K.
Posts: 435
The M5 finder is unique! It also has the extra prism just like the M2,3 & 4 so it doesn't flare. The extra small metering frames are what make it a must have. An MP finder won't show you as accurately where you are metering. Also, the 28mm frame collides with the meter readout on the lower edge, I've looked at a lot of M5's recently and some had the later finder, the 28/90 frame is a car crash in the M5!

Regards

Simon
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #10
Flat Twin
Film Shooter
 
Flat Twin is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oxford, U.K.
Posts: 435
There is a 1992 production M5 on eBay at the moment, it's been there for a while:-

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Last-Batch...cAAOSwU8hY4ncz

Regards,

Simon
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #11
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,987
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Twin View Post
There is a 1992 production M5 on eBay at the moment, it's been there for a while:-

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Last-Batch...cAAOSwU8hY4ncz

Regards,

Simon
Different listing with same/identical camera, but asking $1000 more!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Excellent-La...3D222498611232
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #12
ulrich.von.lich
Registered User
 
ulrich.von.lich is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 234
It must be big for camera collectors to have the last camera ever manufactured that uses the 1.35V mercury battery, banned in Europe in 1991.

But not as much for Leica collectors because we all know they don't want to touch the ugly M5.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #13
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
It must be big for camera collectors to have the last camera ever manufactured that uses the 1.35V mercury battery, banned in Europe in 1991.

But not as much for Leica collectors because we all know they don't want to touch the ugly M5.
You mean: "for Leica users ...".

But not me. The M5 is the best Leica made for USERS. Since I have one, I haven't touched my MP.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #14
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
Whatever happened to that rumor that Leica was making new viewfinders/rangefinders for the M5?
I'm wondering too about this too, tho I thought it was a new batch of viewfinder frames?

That eBay listing is what I saw as well.

An odd thing to bring back for a limited run.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #15
ulrich.von.lich
Registered User
 
ulrich.von.lich is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
You mean: "for Leica users ...".

But not me. The M5 is the best Leica made for USERS. Since I have one, I haven't touched my MP.

Erik.
I meant for Leica collectors the M5 had almost no value.

As to users, some like it as much as others hate it. The best or the worst is purely subjective, I'm afraid.

I had an M5 for six months and absolutely hated it. It was painful for me to hold it, because of the king-size lug in the palm of your hand. I know there are 2-lug M5s, too, but they are meant to be carried in an odd way; and some of them don't have a shutter dial with click stops. Apart from that, I didn't find the meter as accurate as the one on the M6, either. For my shooting style, the spot meter, although nice to have, cannot be the main meter. Besides, I really hated that battery that had almost no shelf-life.

I respect those who like the M5, but affirming it's the best Leica camera can simply be misleading. I would recommend anyone who are interested in buying the camera to try it first. It's the best advice I wish I had received before buying it.

As to the present topic, it might be that Leica wanted to re-issue the camera that had almost killed the company just to show the world it's still alive and doing well, after 20 years. Hence 20 cameras.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #16
Highway 61
Revisited
 
Highway 61's Avatar
 
Highway 61 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
Besides, I really hated that battery that had almost no shelf-life.
You may have used a pesky zinc-air battery which has the worst performances out there and leaks like crazy.

The M5 was designed to use a Varta mercury 1.35V 625PX battery which was the best flat cell battery ever made : extremely long life once put at use, constant voltage until it suddenly dies, incredibly long shelf life if stored in a fridge door (I still have one in a Rollei 35 and another in a Nikkormat FT-N and they both rock in spite of having come from a NOS lot found by chance at a car electronics shop and theorically expired for long).

As you know it, those batteries got banned in 1991. The proper solution is to use an MR-9 adapter with an SR44 (aka 76PX) silver oxyde cell. Such a kit will behave like the original 625PX battery. The zinc-air battery is just a joke.

I have used a friend's black M5 on occasions. With my glasses on, I couldn't really see the whole 35mm frame, nor could I see the meter needle. But that (2 lugs) camera was very pleasant to use and handle. And the RF patch was the best I ever saw in a Leica M finder (owned and used several between 1988 and 2014 : M3, M2, M4, M6 0.72, MP 0.72, M7 0.58).

Not too sure about the collectors thing. I don't really care about this.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #17
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
The MR-9 adapter with an SR44 (aka 76PX) silver oxyde cell works great. I use them in my Leicameters MR and MR4, Nikkormat FTn, Nikon F Photomic FTn and Leica M5. So the battery problem is solved.

When you put your M5 in a good half-case, the hand positioning is no problem at all, it is better than any 35mm reflex. Don't forget this camera has been put on the market to compete with the Nikons F and F2 and the Canon F1 with 50 and 35mm lenses. It was of course not ment to compete with the Leica M4.

The stupid move that Leitz made was the introduction of the Leica CL. That move killed the company almost, not the introduction of the M5.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #18
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
 
Dez's Avatar
 
Dez is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minnesota North Woods
Posts: 1,451
The zinc-air cell has the correct voltage, but will almost certainly corrode the battery contact, already a well-known problem with the M5. Its operating life is short because unlike other technologies, it continues to be chemically active whether it is supplying current or not, contributing to the corrosive vapor outgassing. I would avoid it.
The MR-9 adapter works very well. None of these approaches work as well as the original mercury cell, unfortunately. Mercury cells are unexcelled at maintaining stable voltage over their lifetime. The silver cell with an adapter is as close as we can now come to that performance.

Cheers,
Dez
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #19
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dez View Post
The silver cell with an adapter is as close as we can now come to that performance.
Happily the M5 has a reliable battery-check.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #20
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,987
I had my M5 converted to run on regular batteries. It is the favourite of all my Ms, including 2 M3s, M4-2, M7, M240, MDA. It has the most accurate meter, and the most complete exposure information in the VF out of all of them.
It is also the best body to use with large lenses - like my Nokton 50 1.1 and 35 1.2, as well as the ZM 35 1.4. I'm sure I'd think the same way if I had a Noctilux to mount on it.
Of course, this is all from a user perspective.

I think that in the years to come, the collector market will change as they will realize the significance of the M5, for better or worse, and see it as the last Leica that was built to the highest standards. After the M5 Leica cheapened out on the build and materials used in making their Ms.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #21
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway 61 View Post
...having come from a NOS lot found by chance at a car electronics shop and theorically expired for long.
Sounds familiar. I found some keychains at Home Depot that looked like little gas lanterns; each came with a 625 battery. I bought several... This was either late 1990s or early 2000s. I should see if I still have any!
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #22
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
That's sad. They will never be more valuable than as a camera. They probably are just going to go from one safe or shelf to another, bartered on some perceived value........

Phil Forrest
All values are 'perceived', at that time and place. Still I agree, Sad to see fine (and quite useable) cameras as shelf displays. My M4-2 is as about 'pedestrian' as M mount film Leicas get, unfortunately with my scatter brained mind it too gets far far too little use, so many cameras, so little time.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #23
css9450
Registered User
 
css9450's Avatar
 
css9450 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulrich.von.lich View Post
It must be big for camera collectors to have the last camera ever manufactured that uses the 1.35V mercury battery, banned in Europe in 1991.
Don't be silly. Leica never expected anyone to actually use a 1992 M5.

Seriously, though, none of this explains why they made a new batch of cameras in 1992. I thought unsold M5s sat on shelves at the dealers for years after it was discontinued? The initial run sold poorly, did it not?

I often wonder if the M5 would have sold better had it been styled exactly like an M4, but with the M5's meter and viewfinder. My opinion: Absolutely.
__________________
Nikon S2, S3, F, F2, FM2, FA, N90S, D80, D7000, D750, Sony a6000, Canon IIf, Leica CL, Tower type 3, Zorki 4, Vito B, Perkeo II, Rollei 35....
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #24
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by css9450 View Post
I often wonder if the M5 would have sold better had it been styled exactly like an M4, but with the M5's meter and viewfinder.
Depends on what you mean with "styled". The bigger body was absolutely necessary to house the complex mechanical metering system.

The knobs and lettering are styled like the M4. The logo on the front, "LEICA", dates back to 1960.

Most people that do not like the M5 never used one. Fit and finish, the "feel" of the M5, are a step higher than the M4.

However, they should have made them in black paint.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #25
mpaniagua
Registered User
 
mpaniagua is online now
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico
Age: 44
Posts: 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Twin View Post
There is a 1992 production M5 on eBay at the moment, it's been there for a while:-

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Last-Batch...cAAOSwU8hY4ncz

Regards,

Simon
Got to say price isn't that high. I supposed it would be higher.

Regards

Marcelo
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #26
Flat Twin
Film Shooter
 
Flat Twin is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oxford, U.K.
Posts: 435
All good interesting comments and info above but, the original post was why, in 1992 did Leica re-make 20 examples of the M5? When I heard about this strange move I was intrigued. I guess there is no concrete answer but it would be very interesting to find out.

Regards,

Simon
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #27
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Twin View Post
the original post was why, in 1992 did Leica re-make 20 examples of the M5?
We can speculate on that. In the 1990's the M5 was very popular (and expensive) in Japan. Maybe a Japanese dealer ordered twenty new cameras because he could sell them on profit.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #28
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is online now
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
. . . . Most people that do not like the M5 never used one. . . .
Dear Erik,

Or, alternatively, they had. I started with screw-mount Leicas. Then I bought an M3, which was slightly larger and lumpier than I liked; but the advantages outweighed the disadvantages.

Then I tried an M5, which was huge, horrible, ugly and heavy.

Devotees of M5s either were not attuned to "real" Leicas (screw mount and previous Ms) or were hopelessly clumsy -- like the camera.

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Go to www.rogerandfrances.eu for a whole new website
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #29
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,352
There is no way Leica would have make new parts for such a small run.
The 1992 M5's were assembled from new old stock produced in the 1970's.

A special order is almost certainly what happened.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #30
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by CameraQuest View Post
There is no way Leica would have make new parts for such a small run.
The 1992 M5's were assembled from new old stock produced in the 1970's.

A special order is almost certainly what happened.
Yes, that is exactly what I mean.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #31
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
I tried an M5, which was huge, horrible, ugly and heavy.
Dear Roger,

Did you ever try a Nikon F Photomic FTn?

Cheers,

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #32
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is online now
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
Dear Roger,

Did you ever try a Nikon F Photomic FTn?

Cheers,

Erik.
Dear Erik,

Yes. And it was awful. I had a couple. I don't any more (though I may still have a Photomic T-series head somewhere). But I still have several plain-prism Fs (and a couple of Nikkormats).

I'm not quite sure what you were trying to prove by comparing one overweight, clumsy camera with another. Except that they're both overweight and clumsy.

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Go to www.rogerandfrances.eu for a whole new website
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #33
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
it was awful
Dear Roger,

800.000 buyers didn't think so.

A Nikon F Photomic FTn weights without lens 893 grams.

A Leica M5 weights without lens 683 grams.

Considering the much smaller and much lighter lenses of the M5, the M5 is not big and heavy at all.

Cheers,

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #34
mpaniagua
Registered User
 
mpaniagua is online now
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico
Age: 44
Posts: 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Dear Erik,

Or, alternatively, they had. I started with screw-mount Leicas. Then I bought an M3, which was slightly larger and lumpier than I liked; but the advantages outweighed the disadvantages.

Then I tried an M5, which was huge, horrible, ugly and heavy.

Devotees of M5s either were not attuned to "real" Leicas (screw mount and previous Ms) or were hopelessly clumsy -- like the camera.

Cheers,

R.
Great camera, not so great ergonomics

The Leicas I use the most is a M6 and a IIf. Actually I like the ergonomics of the IIf better, seems it fits better on my hands. I do like the M5 but the ergonomics are kinda awkward. It make me feel manlier though


Best regards.

Marcelo Paniagua
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #35
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
We can speculate on that. In the 1990's the M5 was very popular (and expensive) in Japan. Maybe a Japanese dealer ordered twenty new cameras because he could sell them on profit.

Erik.
Makes the most sense. The parts were likely all in hand, the box in that eBay auction has a 'special' look to it.

__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #36
mpaniagua
Registered User
 
mpaniagua is online now
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico
Age: 44
Posts: 633
Seems someone played with battery cap for a while

Wonder if they took mercury batteries, since banning of mercury batteries started on 1991 and ended on 1998.

Regards

Marcelo
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #37
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is online now
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by sepiareverb View Post
Makes the most sense. The parts were likely all in hand, the box in that eBay auction has a 'special' look to it.. . .
Makes sense to me.

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Go to www.rogerandfrances.eu for a whole new website
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #38
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is online now
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
Dear Roger,

800.000 buyers didn't think so.

A Nikon F Photomic FTn weights without lens 893 grams.

A Leica M5 weights without lens 683 grams.

Considering the much smaller and much lighter lenses of the M5, the M5 is not big and heavy at all.

Cheers,

Erik.
Dear Erik,

And the published weight of an M4 is 545g, just under 140g lighter than an M5: near enough 25% lighter. I'd say that was a significant weight difference,

Your argument is a piece of worthless "whataboutery": "what about the weight of the M5", when I had already pointed out how much smaller and lighter previous Leicas were.

I might as well say, "And my Gandolfi 12x15, with three plate holders, in its case, weighs 30 kg."

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Go to www.rogerandfrances.eu for a whole new website
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #39
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is online now
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
Dear Roger,

800.000 buyers didn't think so.

A Nikon F Photomic FTn weights without lens 893 grams.

A Leica M5 weights without lens 683 grams.

Considering the much smaller and much lighter lenses of the M5, the M5 is not big and heavy at all.

Cheers,

Erik.
Dear Erik,

More useless whataboutery. Ford sold 116,000 Edsels. Are we supposed to deduce from this that the Edsel was a success? Or are you comparing apples and oranges?

For comparison, total production of the Rolls Royce Phantom III was 727; of the Daimler DE36, 205.

Cheers,

R.
__________________
Go to www.rogerandfrances.eu for a whole new website
  Reply With Quote

Old 4 Weeks Ago   #40
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Ford sold 116,000 Edsels.
Total production of the Rolls Royce Phantom III 727;
Total production of the Daimler DE36 205.
Dear Roger,

Great to know this whataboutery, but what has it to do with cameras?

Cheers,

Erik.
  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 14:43.


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

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