Photo: Sony 70-200 f4 G vs Minolta 70-210 f4 "Beercan" on Sony A7II
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 июл 2024
- Sony 70-200mm f/4 G Lens on Amazon (affiliate link):
www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...
Here I do a crazy (?) comparison between the Sony 70-200 f4 G lens, and a much older Minolta 70-210 f4 AF lens.
Full-size test photos uploaded here for your viewing pleasure:
www.flickr.com/photos/mathoma...
great video - so glad you did side by side comparisons and not force the viewer to try and strain with rewinds
I had the Sony 70-200, but sold it and later picked up the beer can. Even though the Sony is slightly better optically (sharper, better contrast, less CA), I prefer the beer can for shooting around people or in urban settings because it's not white, looks less intimidating. In addition, the beer can has slightly shorty MFD, which helps extract more shallow DOF in some situations. It also feels a little smaller (even with adapter). Aside from those differences, both are very good.
I did the same. The cost of "beer can" is only 1/20 the price. Saved lots of $$$
I havent used any minolta since x700. I had samsung lens on it. You brought back my memories. Thank you sir.
Finally a video that gets down to the grits of the lens than just talk about numbers and such.! Subscribed!
TechCrazy Glad you found the vid useful!
This is what I love about RUclips, (besides fail videos) - people sharing their knowledge. Thanks. Subscribed.
Mat Teakle Thanks for taking the time to comment, and thanks for subbing!
Good video. I would agree with your summary. The Minolta is a great lens considering price and age etc. The Sony is better but not 10x better. For me, as a casual shooter, I could not justify dropping $2k on a lens but I can certainly pay $80 for a beer can and will be doing so shortly.
Good video thanks. Not unexpected conclusion. I have a beercan and its fine for my amateur purposes. Thanks for your time on this.
Excellent vid. Love Minolta and the manual lenses. Superb quality and really great to use, even today.
Excellent video, it's inspired me to hopefully do one comparing 3 minolta lenses of almost the same zoom range. One thing that I think is a big thing that makes a difference here is the focus point, as at f4 it can make a big difference at this range. Just because it's set at the same point, doesn't mean it actually focussed there!
Very interesting work! That is why I appreciate my Minolta lenses. On the other hand, I also liked to see the Pat Metheny songbook in your pictures. Greetings from Brazil.
Yeah, if only I could read music worth a darn.
Thanks for sharing. Disproves the theory that you only get what you pay for. Here in England, Minolta is no longer available to buy new. A fact that many regret as it was a well - regarded brand. Regards.
Interesting video, love that you've spent some time figuring it out. I think I picked up my Minolta Beercan for £50 last summer. It's surprisingly great. Though I think I can account for some differences in quality you might be having, the LEA4 adapter should have a glass layer inside it which is something like 85% opaque (15% less transparent) than clear glass. The glass is what's used for autofocus, as I'm not a pro, I decided to go for a standard adapter to avoid the huge price. What i bought was a simple adapter with an aperture control ring, also, because it has no internal glass, it's truer to original quality/light intake. The Sony Adapter is good if you want autofocus and the tripod mount, but you probably loose a little quality.
+Stuart Herrington Yes, I'd say that the fact that the Beercan did so well, even through the adapter, is a good reflection on the Beercan.
Incredible...now i will surely buy a Minolta 70-210!:) Thank you!
Thanks! I was looking for a macro lens and found I have this lens from my old Maxxum camera and was trying to figure if the adapter (to A6000) is worth it. It seems it is. A cheaper solution to the Sony alternative. It is refreshing to see a review where an honest opinon is given, even when it does not favor the latest and greatest (most expensive).
+Einar S Glad you found it useful. I try to keep it real, though I like nice toys. You should hear my hi-fi opinions :-).
Thanks for the video. Minolta is still amazing performer. I bought it for 57USD and it just nothing for such a great lens.
One other thing worth mentioning is video. With the SEL70200G the camera is able to combine the lens stabilization with the in-body stabilization, which makes handheld video really smooth.
Yes, combine it with a gimbal, and you can literally sprint with it @ 200mm and have watchable content!
@@rkan2At 200?! Damn
Hi, my question is, when you use minolta AF lens on Sony A7mark1 with LA-EA adapter, you can photoshooting with AF mode or only manual. And secound question is, can you shooting in 24 mpx full frame mode or only 10mpx aps c mode?
I've been considering these particular lenses so this is a very helpful and informative video for me. As a non-professional, I do not think I can justify the $$$ for the Sony. BTW, several sites have the Sony LA-EA4 A-Mount to E-Mount on sale for $250. For me, investing just over $300 is the way to go.
+runnerpsu Definitely if you don't mind the adapter, the Beercan is a very good lens, esp. for the money. An advantage of having the adapter is it gives you a tripod socket, which the Beercan lacks. I had one person write me to say that they actually got better results, in most respects, with the Beercan vs the 70-200 G lens. Good luck!
Great video. I just got a Minolta beer can. I was so happy with the result. Surprise. Outdoor is a great lens.
Happy shooting!
Gracias por el video Mike. Me he comprado un beer can y estoy muy satisfecho. Increíbles las ópticas viejas.
Back in '05 or so an excellent condition Beercan would sell for $200 - $250. Very iconic lens.
so anyways i got an interesting couple of lenses recently. a Minolta 35-70 f4 and a Minolta 50mm f1.4. i also have the beercan lens as well as a Minolta 75-300 but it's not a constant f4. it's f5.6 or something. i'm using a Sony A850 now and the Konica Minolta 7D.
Nicely done.
The Beercan does vary slightly in IQ from model to model. I was lucky, I got mine in Japan, barely used for just 12,000¥. Even wide open, it’s tack sharp. But it’s the color rendering of the lens. Beautiful reds and blues. Realistic colors? Don’t care, i just like the images i get with it.
Hi Mike. Nice video. I found some interesting points myself comparing the Beercan to more modern lenses.
I have the Beercan 70-210 and the APO 100-300. I noticed that the Beercan loses more than a third of a stop in light transmission compared to the more modern lens. Add the LE-A4 adapter with another third stop light loss and you end up with a dark solution (Actually a bit more than 2/3 stops!). Which is why in your video the manually exposed Beercan shots look darker than the expected 1/3 stop. I still use it on my nex7 camera and even wide open I like the Beercan. (except for the purple fringing )
The Minolta 28-135 is even darker. In combination with the adapter it is a full stop darker at the same f-stop than a native e-lens.
Ahh, good point! I should have thought of the difference in "T-stop" with older lenses with less advanced coatings and glsss. Thanks for pointing that out!
Interesting video Mike. I'm wondering if the Minolta wasn't back focused a little. This would give it an advantage at the right edge shot as those books were further away than the CD case, etc. If you the tripod was off-centered towards the left side, then that too would exaggerate the differences of a back focus. The Sony won the left side and the Minolta won the right side. The Sony was good in the center and the left and was clearly better than on the right. The Minolta on the other hand was at it's best on the right and it's worst on the left and center. Just some thoughts.
Mike.
I appreciate that you provide very informative and useful video for Sony FE users.
I think beercan is still a workhorse for Sony camera and actually looks much better than Sony 70-200 F4.
Glad you found the video useful!
I love my Beercan. I almost always shoot at F4, and what I do need to do, right off the top in post-processing, is to defying Purple (+9) and Green (+9), and reduce vignetting anywhere from +20 to +35. I slide the clarity to +10. I use Camera Raw CS6. I had my Beercan in the drawer for awhile, forgetting its potential, until my trust 6 year-old Tamron 70-200F2.8 (the cheaper, slower-focusing version) failed and I had to shoot a wedding the next day.
The Beercan is a slow focuser so what I do is set my a99 to DMF, let the camera focus on anything, and then I fine-tune the focus using focus peaking.
Helpful suggestions. Thanks!
Could your adapter have more to do with the results than you think?
The beercan is more than 30 years old, and it's quality is not only close to a lens from 2014, but in some details it is even better. A bit frustrating...
I doubt that in 30 years that Sony will be work in the same order, you can't beat metal and glass over electronics and plastics.
The Sony is metal and glass.
Mike Thomas ...And plastic. I have a white Minolta 80-200 f2.8 apo that is metal and glass that will outlast me.
Absolutely true. First: Minolta non manufacturing E mount adapter. All adapters reduce image quality. Why testing Minolta A mount on Sony E ... LoL. Second: Minolta Beercan vs Sony G? LoL Use Minolta AF 70-200mm F2.8 APO G D SSM on Minolta D7D or Sony a77ii ilca and compare image quality on 70-200mm f2.8 sony, nikon and cannon lenses. Non find better. Third: Sony lenses 3 years using and broke Minolta 30 years working perfectly. Minolta only one small negative named cromatic aberation that's all. Mike Thomas only money review. It's standard for cannon, nikon and now is sony money review's ...
@Phil Jones65 Yes I own this lenses. One very good pros. Lens no motor. Newest sony cameras (Sony A77ii very speed motor in body) This 1993 HS Minolta focusing much fast on this time :)
Hi, I got one question as far as this comparison. FF of A7II is much more demanding than APS-C of a6300, which is smaller, so am I thinking right that the differences between 70200F4G and the beercan will be less visible on APS-C?
Possibly. Mainly, the G lens is attractive on the A6300 IMO due to image stabilization in the lens.
Once a person learns what the new features are and how to use them, its an easy decision. great video
Can you do a comparison with a native macro vs. the 100mm F2.8 minolta?
Can I get a la-ea3 adaptor on a7 for this Minolta lens ?
And where does the Minolta 80-200 f/2.8 come into it .. ?
You could do another comparison vid with Minolta AF 80-200mm f2.8 APO and Sony GM 70-200mm f2.8. Or any Sony G Master lens with Minotla G lenses.
I could, if only you'd send me those lenses ;-)
Mike Thomas
I'm in a long process of acquiring those lenses as well😂😂😂
I guess you have other advantages with the Sony in that the focus system is a lot quieter and faster
I have both the beer can and the Sony FE 70-200 F4 G. The Sony is a better lens. The beer can has a lot of purple fringing at F4. The beer can is excellent once stopped down to F5.6 or F8. The Sony is sharp and has no purple fringing at F4. The Sony AF is great for video, too. The beer can is a great bargain but the Sony can do much better job especially in low light thanks to its OSS.
Sorry I know you commented 3 years ago, but I was under the impression that the beercan was just the f/4 locked aperature version and that the other models were inferior despite being newer
Hey, can I use LA-EA3 adapter as a same with minolta af lens? this one is more cheaper...and if the AF working well I will buy the LA-EA3.
LA-EA3 will not auto focus with the Minolta (or any old screw drive lens); only with SAM (not the fastest), SSM and maybe even some 3rd party. The LA-EA4 will autofocus, as it has a motor, but you also lose some light, as it also has the SLT mirror in it. If you don't mind manual focus, then the LA-EA3 is a good bargain. I don't mind manual focus as much, with focus peaking being available, in the camera.
that adopter Lea4 for the Minolta lens to fit on the Sony camera does not focus on the subject.....
I have to ask, were these two lenses “Micro Adjusted” , because I can achieve better course detail on my “Beer Can”. Secondly there is of course at least 35years between the two lenses. If you take for example a Minolta 50mm f2.8 AF and the 50mm AF 3.5 the 3.5 is a better lens all round because the 3.5 is a new design (10years younger).
Hi buddy! Great video! Have you had problems adapting the bearcan lens to the A7? Any issues with the auto focus? I just bought a different minotla, 100-300mm, and nothing works on my A7r2 with the adapter . The lens works fine on my a58. So, looking for something else.
I never had any issues with the beercan, that I can recall. I used it with the LA-EA4 adapter and it worked fine. I think I also had the 100-300 and that worked fine too. I used the beercan a lot more often, though. Good luck!
Thanx !! ;-)
It would have been nice to stop the lenes down to F8- F11 would have been more interesting and indicative of lens performance
Got my can of beer for 45 Euro (ca. $54) today, shipping included. Curious about it's performance.
Have Nikon Z6 (and appropriate adapters for Minolta AF or Sony E).
Have also the "Magic Drainpipe", Canon 70-200 1:4L and some more (and all adapters for Nikon Z).
My gut feeling is that Sony E or Nikon Z lens could be convenient but way, way overpriced.
The size and the weigh is also a factor.
With all the intelligent adapters now available probably the most sensitive choice is the Canon 70-300 IS (non-L), provided you already have the EF-E or EF-Z adapters. One more thing: these adapters can make the Sony / Nikon or Canon "R" a better Canon EF than the Canon EF: they usually have the firmware fix and the ancient third-party EF lens can be used without re-chipping.
I tried the Cosina 28-80 and Sigma 18-35 made at the dawn of the EF era. All modern Canon cameras will give you "ERR 01". However, the cheapest Viltrox EF-Z adapter will make them work like a charm on the Nikon Z6, same with Fringier.
(Sorry, Viltrox folks: Fringer firmware is still better and hunts less).
Earlier or later the manufacturers of these adapters will consolidate and have the distribution channels in every major market. This will make the price of old lens skyrocket.
Sure, for general purpose the Sony 70-200 on Sony will attract the professional photographers. If one makes his living from the photography, the Sony 70-200 (bought new from Adorama or B&H, of course) is just a change.
The "regular" consumers will be very happy with iPhone & Co.
The prosumer enthusiasts will experiment with the oddball lens alone for the fun factor and find some gems on eBay.
As a result, the price of these gems will go up. Before the mirrorless era the old Fujica AX mount or old Konica AR mount was useless, the Exacta or Praktica "B" mount was barely useable (only on Canon and mirror tended to hit the back of the lens on many Canon full-frames). Now the price of Fujica AX lens exploded. Good luck finding the 19mm EBC Fujinon in AX mount or a CZJ Biotar in a decent shape in any mount.
You already got snow? Here in Montreal we're having a green Christmas. Sad sad sad.
Yeah, we've had couple of good-sized snows thus far. I'll trade for your green Christmas!
I bought my beercan lens in Osaka in brand new condition for 12,000¥, or $120. Do know that this lens varies from lens to lens in CA and sharpness. My lens is way sharp and my problems with CA are practically non-existent, but that my not be true for your beercan lens. Always check old lenses for mold and sticky aperture blades!
...And, yea, the EA-4 makes any A Mount lens almost 1/2 stop darker.
I'm a little confused, what do you mean by a 100% crop?
That means the photo is displayed on the monitor such that a pixel from the file maps directly to a pixel on the display. You are usually looking at a photo on your monitor "zoomed out" (many pixels from the file represented by one pixel on the monitor). Viewing at 100% is the max you can zoom in without getting pixelation. I probably should have just said "100%" rather than "100% crop", since I didn't really show a crop from the original file. Anyway, hope that helps.
What caught my eye to be honest are Carlos Castaneda's Books :)
+Nagual Pro Hehe. Given your user name, I'm not surprised.
+Mike Thomas haha
90% of people would not appreciate those slight differences in quality, lets not also forget that G lens will be significantly heavier. Save the environment and buy secondhand.
The difference in performance might be mostly due to the adapter. I suspect the Minolta would perform better on a native A-mount camera like Sony A900 or a99. And yes, all E-mount glass is ridiculously overpriced. Not just compared to those old Minoltas but to new Nikon's and Canon's as well.
The Minolta performs exceptionally well on the A99 (and it also does well on APS-C) as many have said the only real weakness is the CA which can at times be pretty heavy (not always though). The 100-200mm F4.5 has much less CA, but also can't focus close (I have both excellent lenses for a silly low cost)
LOL, so do you think the grand difference is really worth it when you have to zoom in by those amounts?
I have the direct inverted outcome. My Beercan out performs the native Lens.
@200mm F4 the beer can has better sharpness, contrast, colour and much better out of focus rendering
The 70-200 is brighter, less vignetting, autofocus and supports eye detect
The biggest drawbacks of the native lens is price, softness wide open @ 200mm, min focal distance and muted colour.
If you can live without the autofocus speed and weather sealing than the Minolta is better choice.
+Phiniox Glade Good points. You'll notice I didn't go all head-over-heels on the 70-200. I expected it to way outperform the beer can, but it only edged it out. The usability improvements and slight performance improvement make the G lens a painful but (only) slightly better purchase, for my purposes.
+Mike Thomas much agreed. There is a lot of quality control differences in Sony FE lenses. My 70-200 is soft at 200 but other people report it as sharp, even peak sharpness. My peak is at ~135, same as DXO. People complain that the 16-35 is soft but mine F4@16mm is razor sharp, even the corners.
Maybe I have a really good copy of the 16-35 and a bad copy of the 70-200.
Either way I prefer headshots with the Beercan because of it far nicer rendering and min focus is much closer.
+Mike Thomas yep that's why I got the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 with laea3 instead. sharper at 2.8 than the Sony at F4
+shaolin95 weather sealed? How's the AF? Can it track subjects? What body are you using
+Phiniox Glade AF is great on the A7rii but you got limited AF options sadly so that is the trade. i did find a copy of the FE 70-200 that is extremely sharp at 200mm in the center. But the F4 just is not for me. Images just lack the 3D look you get with the Tamron. The good pointsof the Sony are the Eye AF and other AF features. Also the Sony AF is super fast and it's so tiny you can fit it any where so i am considering keeping it for when I'm traveling.
My copy seems pretty unique since it's sharper at 200mm than at 135mm which was supposed to be its sweet spot.
Will this la-ea4 adapter and the minolta lens combo works exactly the same on A6000? Thanks in advance.
+MT Nguyen I don't have an A6000 to test with, but google suggests that it should work fine.
+MT Nguyen it works fine. Its less sharp but that to be expected on the high density sensor of the a6000.
The 70-200 F4 is also weaker or the a6000 but easier to handle
The A6000 is APS-C; the LA-EA2 is intended for that size sensor. The LA-EA4 is for full frame cameras. I have neither, but it would be interesting to see if there was a difference using the full frame Beercan on an APS-C camera.
The problem here, when you refer to a 10x difference in price is that you don't include the adapter price that would bring the comparison to something like 2x difference in price. Or am I missing something?
No, you actually have a very good point. But once you have that adapter (I did), then all such lenses are a bargain in comparison to a lot of newer lenses. Still ... very good point, and something to bear in mind.
If you buy the adapter, then you can buy all those superb Minolta lenses at low prices. You might like the 100-300APO. You'd hate the cheap 75-300.
Or you could buy an A-mount body
Have you looked at the forum www.dyxum.com? If not I think you'd find it very informative - see lens reviews www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp. I don't buy any which are rated below 4.5/5. (Cheap kit lenses can be below 3.5). These are subjective reviews by multiple owners, averaged out. It's really worth looking.
I'm sure you'll agree that photography is much more about you than about the equipment anyway - providing you keep away from actually poor lenses like the SAL75-300.
I love my beercan
I picked up this beercan lens from an exchange high street shop for £15. Suits me fine as it is not a lens which will get a great deal of use so no need for the Sony at about £1,000.
I have watched this video and in my opinion as a photographer for 40 years the Minolta it a worthy contender compared to the price of the Sony glass.
I can only count 30 years, but I agree entirely.
Hi,
Again another very informative video which all RUclips videos should be alas no.
Look at the no. of subscribers you get and those who are more sensationalising with over 100,000 subscribers. I prefer yours. Give us more informative videos, cheers.
Thanks! Glad you found the video useful :-)
I think the la-ea4 adapter steals difference amount of light depending on the lens.
Both Sony Zeiss A Mount 24-70 2.8 and 85 1.4 are about a stop to a stop and half darker than I would expect.
The 85 @ 1.4 is darker than FE 55 1.8 at f2. The 24-70 @ 2.8 was so dark I couldn't see stars to focus on but the FE 16-35 had no trouble.
A cheap Tokina AF 19-35mm f3.5-4.5 is easily as bright as the FE 28-70.
Of course it just might be that the T-Stop on the high end and complex Zeiss glass is really slow.
+Phiniox Glade Re T-stop, you would certainly hope otherwise given the fancy designs and coatings, but you might be right.
I would buy an LA-EA3 adapter but the only A-Mount lens I own with the SAM or SSM motor is the SAL2470Z. It an expensive proposition to check the difference between no beam splitter or with a beam splitter
First half of video, you still don't see comparison of the two, so skip to the half.
My only comment is that you overstate the difference between the lenses with comments like x wipes the floor with y etc. You do this both ways so you don't heavily come down on the side of either but the differences in the images both on the screen and later examined in flicker certainly do not warrant such exclamations as the differences really are in most cases minor and in some I would claim, even subjective. I own both, I'm selling the Sony because I consider the Beercan to be superior in many ways.
Another option is to get the Minolta 80-200mm f/2.8. Roughly half the cost of the Sony, plus you get an extra stop of light. It's a pretty heavy beast however, and of course you'd still need the adapter.
+CDNChaoZ Yeah, the size and adapter put it out of the running for me. I do wish Sony would come out with a native version of the even longer zooms, though, for those times where you really need the reach and can trade-off the size and weight.
What about stopped down to f8? I was waiting for it but…? No thumbs up. Not down either, but please, - just one aperture don’t say anything.
Wide open is the torture test. Generally if a lens does well there it will do well at smaller apertures. That said, I agree it would’ve been nice to have results at f/8 but my basement is not all that bright, so we probably would’ve had some noise issues to deal with, at least in that segment.
The beercan is used with an adapter. Adapters always reduce some image quality. I can only compare the Beercan with pro Canon 70-200L lenses which I also used. Comparing the Beercan with those Canon lenses (probably the same as Sony)The IQ from the beercan is very good. The beercan also gives you those specific, vintage Minolta colors. That's what it is all about; colors and not sharpness! My advise; buy the beercan or buy two of them.
Interesting to hear. Yeah, I made the point about light loss, but you're right -- you lose some acutance too, so the Beercan did even better than I could demonstrate.
Cause with the e-mount you need an adapter and it changes everything, the focusing, the cropping... as if you tried the minolta glasses on a a-mount alpha, designed for it the result would be perfect. Sony hates this format and expects to erase the Alpha for their Nex, e-mount format. that's the thing. perso I'm gonna keep my A55 and soon get a 77 or 99.
Patachu
Meh... DSLT just achieved perfections.
your camera wasn't parallel to the bookshelves (it was tilted down). Your results are invalid.
Sir, a belated thank you for this interesting and informative video.
To the end of selecting older Minolta lenses (or any A or E mount), may I refer your viewers to the forum www.dyxum.com (composed of Dynax and Maxum). It ranges from users' reviews of materials to forums for discussion and help. I've seen no comparable forum for users of other manufacturers' equipment. Really worth a visit. It covers A and E mounts, and a great range of 3rd party manufacturers too. It includes currently manufactured equipment. It doesn't cover MC or MD mounts. You can consult reviews and forums without joining, but posting/uploading requires (free) membership.
For those who want a “Beer Can” I strongly suggest buying it from Japan, if they say it is 95% very good condition they mean really excellent condition. But the micro adjusts are the key to giving you more.
Sir, I find your comments very interesting. Could you please explain micro adjusts and how to do them or where to get them done? Does it apply to all lenses?
@@jjmcrosbie Sure, with some of the later full frame Sony offerings, in the menu is the Micro Adjust function. What this function does is allows you to adjust the focus point very accurately. What I mean by that is the focus point could be focusing to far forward or back of where it should be. You place your camera on a ridged tripod, levelled and at 90 degrees to a black lined graph paper. You press the focus button and the camera should focus perfectly. This usually is not the case, in the menu in camera adjust section, you will find the Micro Adjust. This let’s you adjust the focus point super accurately. It enables the focus point to be exactly where you need it to be. Just about all older lenses need at least a small adjustment plus or minus so that the distance of sharp focus is the same front and back of the focus point. You can use the Focus Peaking function in addition to confirm micro focus as well.
@@leemccurtayne9489 Sir, thank you for your reply. In my case, the phrase "some of the later full frame Sony offerings" explains why I never found Micro Adjust. I'm limited to A37 and A390, ie older APS-C models. So I'll have to press on as before.
But thank you for your time and consideration in preparing this reply. I appreciate it.
Two big problems with E mount cameras in general. Smaller mount diameter (think light). Using adapters sucks up light.
The A mount system is still king.
You can pay a pro price for an E mount camera, but it won't perform as well as an A mount pro camera.
The mount diameter itself is much larger than any reasonable aperture of any lens you might ever put on. For example, the Leica M-mount is very small, yet it supports a 50mm f/0.95 lens, and longer lenses at f/1.4.
But yeah, adapters suck up light (which I cover in this vid).
Mike Thomas
Mount diameters...
Minolta/Sony A: 49.7mm
Sony E: 46.1mm
Fuji X: 44mm
Canon EF: 54mm
Pentax K: 44mm
Nikon F: 44mm
A narrow mount diameter is a big no-no with IBIS.
The E cameras are technically flawed from the get go. It's a great marketing coo, but an A mount will always have the edge.
JACKnJESUS Whatever gets you through the night, man.
Mike Thomas
I was going to pull the trigger, but after extensive research, I'm staying put.
King???? King of the delusional owners you mean, right?
If your comments have been made 4 years ago instead of 4 weeks, then maybe it would have been more solid. Right now...is just sad lol
Booooooring :(
Looking forward to checking out your exciting work here on RUclips.
Oh wait ... you got nothin'. Figures.
@@mike.thomas I'm with you Mike!