Camcorder with viewfinder and optical zoom > 30x - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 39 Old 10-07-2013, 07:31 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Poterium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Good evening.

I would like to ask for a qiestion. I'm looking for a camcorder with viewfinder and optical zoom > 30x, but I cannot find anything at all. It' s very strange, because I've had such cameras in the past? have we returned to 90s? is it possible? Any idea would be usefull. Thanky you

Poterium is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 39 Old 10-07-2013, 08:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,822
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 90
A variety of market, economic and technological events are changing the choices. Different from the '90s is that all cameras have to do both video and photos. And, we have "bridge" or "hybrid" cameras.

Further, viewfinders have been left off nearly all consumer camcorders.

One model that has been a favorite for some here is the Panasonic FZ200. It has 24x optical zoom and an option for an adapter that increases that. It has the viewfinder you want and as well as what is expected as normal features in a video camera.

Another model that hasn't been discussed here but is a favorite for many is the Canon SX50 with it's 50x optical zoom.

Good luck!

Bill
bsprague is offline  
post #3 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 12:10 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Poterium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Dear bsprague,

Thanks for the advice, but these are cameras. I want a camcorder. The viewfinder is necessary if you want to take good video. I cannot understand why the manufacturers don't put it now. Is it so difficult? How did they put it at old camcorders?

Poterium is offline  
post #4 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 05:17 AM
Advanced Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Hi Poterium - Consumer demand and market segmentation since the 90s have pushed camcorder viewfinders to the high end and long optical zooms to the low end.

The modern cameras closest to your requirement are the $1699 prosumer Canon HF G30 and $2199 professional Canon XA20. Both feature viewfinders and 20x optical zooms.

The best modern camera with a 30x optical zoom is last year's lower end $479 Sony HDR-CX260V - but it has no viewfinder (and no headphone jack)

If you're really looking for a 90s solution, the big shoulder mounted Panasonic AG-AC7 costs $1148, has a viewfinder and a 23x optical zoom smile.gif

Sorry I couldn't be more helpful.

Bill B.
Hybrid Camera Revolution
brunerww is offline  
post #5 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 07:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,822
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poterium View Post

Dear bsprague,
Thanks for the advice, but these are cameras. I want a camcorder. The viewfinder is necessary if you want to take good video. I cannot understand why the manufacturers don't put it now. Is it so difficult? How did they put it at old camcorders?
My humble apology. You question stated you wanted any useful idea that would shoot good video that had a viewfinder and big zoom.
bsprague is offline  
post #6 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 07:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Poterium: I know of a camcorder that has:

1. A viewfinder.

2. Shoots 108060p, the best of any consumer camcorder and some pro camcorders. Also shoots HD slo mo: 720p at 120fps.

3. Has a 24X power zoom, which is f2.8 all the way.

4. Has a stereo mic.

5. Has an external mic input.

6. Has an articulating lcd screen.

It costs less than $600.

Is there any feature that is missing you need?

If you are interested in this, I'll give you the link.
markr041 is offline  
post #7 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 09:30 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Poterium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Poterium is offline  
post #8 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 10:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,822
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poterium View Post

Thank you markr041. It look a good choice. I'm interested.
I'm interested too! And, are there any accessories you can add to it to get more optical zoom?
bsprague is offline  
post #9 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 12:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

I'm interested too! And, are there any accessories you can add to it to get more optical zoom?

Yes, I am glad you asked: a relatively cheap add-on lens gives you 1100mm at the tele end!
markr041 is offline  
post #10 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 12:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poterium View Post

Thank you markr041. It look a good choice. I'm interested.

See post #2.
markr041 is offline  
post #11 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 12:41 PM
Advanced Member
 
fishywishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 19
a sony hx300 is also an option
fishywishy is offline  
post #12 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 01:08 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Poterium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Unfortunately, sony hx300 is a camera.

Poterium is offline  
post #13 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 02:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poterium View Post

Unfortunately, sony hx300 is a camera.

First, I was talking about the Panasonic.

Second, I think many of here would not understand your objection ("It's a camera!"), now that you have revealed you want a video device with all the features I listed and did not reveal any feature any that it did not have that you needed.

The fact that it is a "camera" only means it can take stills better than any camcorder, but in this case without sacrificing any video feature or quality that almost any camcorder has.

So, please inform us what is it about the Panasonic SZ200 that disqualifies it, other than it looks like a camera?
markr041 is offline  
post #14 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 02:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,822
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

....... other than it looks like a camera?
I was on a cruise ship. The ship had some staff people with some amazing looking rigs. I had a little pocket camera. At the end of the trip the amazing rigs produced a standard definition DVD for sale. I went home with HD 1080p60. At least they looked like real videographers.
bsprague is offline  
post #15 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 03:45 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Poterium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

As I wrote at my first question I asked for any useful advice for a camcorder and not a camera. Nevertheless, thank you all for your replies. I am using cameras and camcorders for many years and I know, as it is obvious for anyone who has used both of them, that the quality of a video by a camera has nothing to do with the quality of it by a camcorder. Moreover, the camera is manufactured for photos! All the functions are set up for a certain purpose: photos! Even the way you can hold it. I find it very strange that it is so difficult to understand the difference between a camcorder and a camera... It is so obvious!!!

 

"So, please inform us what is it about the Panasonic SZ200 that disqualifies it, other than it looks like a camera?"

I' ve already have a Panasonic camera and, of course, the video quality and the relevant features of it are extremely worse with respect to my old video device Canon (5 years old)!

Poterium is offline  
post #16 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 04:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,686
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 59
The Canon VIXIA HF G30 has 20x optical and 400x digital zoom so just use digital zoom to get your 30x and the quality should not be that bad . The only youtube video showing digital zoom was bad because he handheld it all the way to 400x.




jogiba is offline  
post #17 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 05:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poterium View Post

As I wrote at my first question I asked for any useful advice for a camcorder and not a camera. Nevertheless, thank you all for your replies. I am using cameras and camcorders for many years and I know, as it is obvious for anyone who has used both of them, that the quality of a video by a camera has nothing to do with the quality of it by a camcorder. Moreover, the camera is manufactured for photos! All the functions are set up for a certain purpose: photos! Even the way you can hold it. I find it very strange that it is so difficult to understand the difference between a camcorder and a camera... It is so obvious!!!

"So, please inform us what is it about the Panasonic SZ200 that disqualifies it, other than it looks like a camera?"
I' ve already have a Panasonic camera and, of course, the video quality and the relevant features of it are extremely worse with respect to my old video device Canon (5 years old)!

Sorry, but since you have not used any of the equipment *we are talking about*, you actually are just, well literally prejudiced (it's not illegal or immoral for cameras/camcorders). Your knowledge as well as your equipment is out of date. And we are here to help, if you would just listen.

Here are some videos shot with that mysterious camcorder whose features you wanted: a baseball game (sports are the most challenging to shoot), a little travelogue, both shot in 108060p.

You can download the original files, and you tell us why you think these are inferior to what your current camcorder can produce:

https://vimeo.com/65513578 (this uses in part the 1100mm lens)

https://vimeo.com/58316168

In fact, please download the originals so you can watch them on your large-screen 1080 LED or plasma HDTV to see their real quality (you have one of those, right?).

The people on this site have loads of experience with cameras and camcorders shooting video, much more (combined) than you do. You do not have to listen, but you should at least check out what we are saying.

It is precisely what has happened recently that you are missing, changes that will mean camcorders will be gone in a few years, overtaken by (gasp) - cameras - that take both good stills and video.
markr041 is offline  
post #18 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 05:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,822
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poterium View Post

.... I am using cameras and camcorders for many years and I know, as it is obvious for anyone who has used both of them, that the quality of a video by a camera has nothing to do with the quality of it by a camcorder. Moreover, the camera is manufactured for photos! All the functions are set up for a certain purpose: photos! Even the way you can hold it. I find it very strange that it is so difficult to understand the difference between a camcorder and a camera... It is so obvious!!!

You are absolute correct. But what is hard to understand, until you've done it, is to see how Sony and Panasonic teamed up and made AVCHD, 1080p60 and Blu-Ray that match the best capabilities of the most expensive TVs. So even the most expensive camcorders and the cheapest "cameras" do similar things. They all take HD video.
bsprague is offline  
post #19 of 39 Old 10-08-2013, 06:56 PM
Advanced Member
 
fishywishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poterium View Post

"So, please inform us what is it about the Panasonic SZ200 that disqualifies it, other than it looks like a camera?"
I' ve already have a Panasonic camera and, of course, the video quality and the relevant features of it are extremely worse with respect to my old video device Canon (5 years old)!

well that explains a lot
fishywishy is offline  
post #20 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 04:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Is the FZ200s video noticably better than the FZ150 outdoors,i have one and the video quality is far below my Canon HF-30 or EOS M for that matter.
flintyplus is offline  
post #21 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 05:44 AM
Member
 
bobk77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post

Is the FZ200s video noticably better than the FZ150 outdoors,i have one and the video quality is far below my Canon HF-30 or EOS M for that matter.

I found FZ200 video quality is slightly better than FZ1500 outdoor, much better indor (I traded FZ150 to FZ200), but would not much neither Canon HF-30 or EOS M.
FZ200 also cost less that 1/3 of Canon HF-30. EOS M is a completely ditternt toy.
bobk77 is offline  
post #22 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 06:11 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobk77 View Post

I found FZ200 video quality is slightly better than FZ1500 outdoor, much better indor (I traded FZ150 to FZ200), but would not much neither Canon HF-30 or EOS M.
FZ200 also cost less that 1/3 of Canon HF-30. EOS M is a completely ditternt toy.
44

Sorry i dont follow what you meen regarding the HF-G30/EOS M,most reports i have heard give the two Panasonic cameras similar outdoor performance,The FZ150 has far less resolution than the G30 and a bit less than the EOS M which also has a better looking all round video quality.
flintyplus is offline  
post #23 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 08:02 AM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Poterium, it looks like YOU dont know the differences between cameras and camcorders - do you know the dfference between codecs, bit-depth, latitude, color info, resolution etc? Saying that to guys like mark is simply nonsense LOL. Hes a camera-freak, just like most of us.

And if you are going to buy a consumer AVCHD 1080p camera, the difference wont be THAT big from a point & shoot to a bridge or even a dedicated camcorder. If you want real image quality, buy a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera + External viewfinder. You can also buy a 100-300mm (900mm equiv) lens, so you will have more zoom than any of those camcorders. Be prepared to spend at least 4k.

If you dont want to spend that much, just but anything those guys are suggesting. GW77, FZ200, LX7, ZS30, HX300, V700, TM900 etc. As 8-bit cameras, they are all decent.
thedest is offline  
post #24 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 08:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,822
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 90
thedest,

There may be something I don't get!

I would love to own a Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera. But I think it would be nearly useless unless I buy a movie theater with a digital projection system.

There is nothing used to view video that fits in a home or office that goes beyond 1920x1080. The best consumer projectors, TVs, monitors, tablets and smartphones will not make what comes out of a Black Magic noticeably different to the standard issue eyeball when viewed on what we have. I'm not sure many own computers strong enough to edit Black Magic footage either.

If I were to make "indie films" for film festivals I might have some real use for a BMPCC.

What part of the Black Magic am I not understanding? Or, would it be as useless to me as I think it is?

Bill
bsprague is offline  
post #25 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 08:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
xfws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 26
The FZ200 looks great, some of the best footage posted here...but I wouldn't want to hold that kind of form factor all the time hand-held versus a much more comfortable camcorder with the strap that can be held one-handed. (If hand-held is important to OP.)

I think the Panasonic x900 with a viewfinder, although not 30X, would be a good choice.

If you need the equivalent of "30X zoom", you can just move that much closer to your subject.
xfws is offline  
post #26 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 09:46 AM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

thedest,

There may be something I don't get!

I would love to own a Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera. But I think it would be nearly useless unless I buy a movie theater with a digital projection system.

There is nothing used to view video that fits in a home or office that goes beyond 1920x1080. The best consumer projectors, TVs, monitors, tablets and smartphones will not make what comes out of a Black Magic noticeably different to the standard issue eyeball when viewed on what we have. I'm not sure many own computers strong enough to edit Black Magic footage either.

If I were to make "indie films" for film festivals I might have some real use for a BMPCC.

What part of the Black Magic am I not understanding? Or, would it be as useless to me as I think it is?

Bill

Yep, you got it wrong Bill.

Blackmagic has 3 cameras. A 4k, a 2.5k and a 1080p camera. The pocket camera only shoots 1080p video. Im not talking about resolution. What makes the Blackmagic stand out from the crowd is:

- DYNAMIC RANGE: you have 13 stops of dynamic range. Our ordinary cameras have like 8 stops. That means less crushed shadows and less blown out highlights. Thats probably one of the best features of the camera, and you can see the difference in dynamic range wether you are using a 360p monitor or a 4k tv.

- COLOR INFO: those ordynary cameras record color information in 4:2:0 format. That means 3/4 of the color information is going to the trash. That results in a video with artificial colors, almost fluorescent. The Blackmagic records at 4:2:2 (preserves half of color info) and 4:4:4 (preserves all color info). That means natural colors, and Hollywood like colors.

- CODEC: ordinary cameras record videos at AVCHD 2.0 28+Mbps. Thats is A LOT of compression. That kind of compression reduces the amount of detail in your videos, creates more artifacts etc. The Blackmagic records at ProRes 422, the same CODEC used by professionals. The compression is at 220Mbps, so you will have more details, less compressions etc.

- RESOLUTION: In 1080p territory, the Blackmagic Pocket has one of the best resolutions, but that aspect is the least important of those 4.

- COMPUTER TO DEAL WITH THE VIDEOS: its actually the opposite of what you are thinking. Videos that are more compressed are harder to work with. Since the compression of AVCHD is 10 times higher, is actually worse to work with, and its very slow. Yes, the files of the Blackmagic will be bigger, and that means you will need a good amount of RAM memory, but the computer processor will thank you, because it's easier for them to work with ProRes!

We had that discussion a few months ago, about processing power, and let me tell you. Im currently editing A LOT of 4K RAW, 2.5K RAW and 1080p ProRes videos from BlackMagic IN MY NOTEBOOK, and its handling ALL of those files EASILY, so dont worry about post processing.
.

.
Here you can see a screen grab from the BlackMagic Pocket video that im currently playing with (And yes! Thats a video, not an HDR picture!!):



.

.
And here is a draw I made for you with the main differences biggrin.gif:D:D:D:D:D:D



In the left you have ALL 8-bit cameras, and in the right you have the BlackMagic.

1. The skyes in the 8-bit is artificial-blue and has no gradation, is just one big blue thing. In the Blackmagic it has gradations and it has a real-life blue color.

2. Due to the lack of dynamic range, the highlights are blown-out (white clouds) and your shadows are just a simple black mud. In the Blackmagic your highlights are preserved (detailed clouds) and you can see shadow information.

3. The colors in 4:2:0 space are really artificial.

4. Due to the lower compression, better codec and great sensor, the Blackmagic has more detail, as you can see in the pores I made in that dudes face biggrin.gif. Even if both are 1080p, the Blackmagic will look like a higher resolution video because of the amount of detail it preserves - so yes, you WILL be able to see the difference in your 1080p screen.
.

.
When you watch you videos made with 8-bit cameras you think: "Man, that video looks nice, but its not movie-like nice, what am I doing wrong?"

And the answer is: 8-bit cameras are NOT cinematic!!

The problem ends with the Blackmagic pocket, because its the first affordable digital camera that WILL GIVE you cinema like images!
brunerww likes this.
thedest is offline  
post #27 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 09:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,822
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 90
thedest,

Thanks! Is ProRes 422 an Apple thing? You probably told me, but what NLE do you use for the Black Magic footage?
bsprague is offline  
post #28 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 09:58 AM
Advanced Member
 
fishywishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 526
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 19
could also try a sony hx50 with the evf add-on smile.gif
fishywishy is offline  
post #29 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 10:05 AM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

thedest,

Thanks! You probably told me, but what NLE do you use for the Black Magic footage?

Im using Premiere Pro, and it works really well with ProRes. Im getting almost no frame drops in real time playback during the editing process.
thedest is offline  
post #30 of 39 Old 10-09-2013, 10:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
flintyplus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: yeovil somerset
Posts: 1,176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by flintyplus View Post

Is the FZ200s video noticably better than the FZ150 outdoors,i have one and the video quality is far below my Canon HF-30 or EOS M for that matter.

https://vimeo.com/76538640

https://vimeo.com/76539045
flintyplus is offline  
Reply Camcorders

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off