About 10 years ago when this high fps stuff started to become better and better in dslrs, all the sports shooters had a freak out because they got worried that their license fees would go up because events would charge them for the motion picture license not the still license. I don’t know if this ended up becoming true but it was all the talk at WEVA for years. Sony have always made great cameras, unfortunately their primes don't hold a candle to Canon or Nikon. Anyone who reaaalllly cares about this feature is probably shooting fixed (tho I've been out of the industry a long time I'm sure it's changed)
A common practice among Sony shooters is to adapt Canon/Nikon glass to the Sony body if Sony glass doesn't cover a shot. Auto Focus takes a small to complete hit when this happens but it is less of an issue for stills than video.
Impressive camera for sure but something missing in a couple articles I've seen on this is glossing over the fact that Nikon/Canon have a huge library of lenses.
With photography it's largely the lens that drives the photo(which makes sense when you think of photographing in terms of painting with light). Until you see Sony breaking out the 300mm F2.8, 400mm F2.8, 600mm F4 and others you won't see much pick-up on the segment they're targeting(1DX, etc). For instance a 400mm F2.8 goes for 2x the cost of this camera alone(~$10k).
There's adapters for EF->Sony, however they're hit and miss on functionality and focusing speed.
OTOH, being a mirrorless system you can use an adapter for pretty much any lens ever made, not only Canon but any possible glass that has been used in the modern history of photography. And some times without any significant loss of functionality.
But yeah, its true. Professionals take to stick to brands for a lot of reasons. Investment already made in lenses, repairability, how easy is to find a colleague during a job that can loan you some missing equipment, etc...
Sony is not going to conquer the professional market overnight, granted, but it's important to have this camera in their catalog to start moving things in that direction.
Sony has a 300mm f2.8 and 500mm f4, so it's not a million miles behind.
The system as a whole is getting pretty compelling TBH.
Using a camera that can focus track and calculate exposure at over 20fps with nearly 700 auto focus points across almost the whole frame would for sure let me capture stuff I couldn't on any other camera.
And that's not to mention the silent shutter at this speed - I could literally capture photos I wouldn't be allowed to (golf anyone???) with a mechanical and noisy shutter.
Even if I did it on a 500mm f4 and cropped in some of those 24mp!
I'm a Nikon guy (well, I did shoot with the old a900 and some Canon/Olympus stuff too) and I'd certainly consider working very hard to deal with any lens short comings with a camera this capable.
Sony's been doing an impressive job. But another factor that dovetails with Canon/Nikon system investments is that all of these big DSLRs have features that are already well past the point of diminishing returns for a lot of people. I have a Canon 5Diii and I have no urge to upgrade it much less switch systems. (To be honest, I don't even use it all that much because I have other cameras that are far smaller and do a perfectly adequate job for most things.)
Not being a camera guy, can someone explain to me why all these stats are awesome? I mean, they sound awesome, but I'm a sucker for people telling me things are awesome.
This is Sony's first true professional mirrorless camera.
The professional camera industry is going through a paradigm shift. From SLRs (cameras with a mirrors that flap with each photo and make the unique clack sound) to Mirrorless.
You needed the mirror during the film days, because you needed to see what the lens was seeing. Now, you can capture what the lens is seeing from the sensor into an electronic viewfinder.
However, there is still an opinion that an SLR (Nikon or Canon) is a real professional tool. From built quality, to focus speed (phase detect), frames/second, battery life, dual card capture, etc.
Sony's new A9 is designed to go head to head against the top of the line professional cameras from Nikon and Canon. At least on many of the specs.
That said, I'm still not convinced it's going to be as robust as a Nikon D5 or Canon's 1Dx, etc.
I'm a Nikon user now (was canon for a long time) and I abuse my camera a lot. From rain, extreme cold, etc. And the camera continues to work. Many of my photographer friends on FB are unhappy with reliability of the Sony's A7 series and switched back to Canon and Nikon due to reliability issues. So even though the A9 has all the specs, it may still not be the camera pros shooting Olympics, etc. switch to.
What this article totally misses is that this is Sony's flagship offering not for all professional photographers, but specifically for professional SPORTS photographers.
Sports photographers need super fast continuous shooting so you can get 20 shots of that epic catch in one shutter press and choose the best one. Likewise 1/32,000th of a sec shutter speed is twice as fast as most cameras' 1/8,000th of a sec fastest shutter speed, which helps to freeze quick motion.
The high number of AF points is a sports feature too - one area that mirrorless still significantly lags traditional DSLRs is that their AF systems are not as fast as the type used in DSLRs, which have dedicated AF sensors (mirrorless does AF off the imaging sensor), so a ton of AF points is one way mirrorless tries to narrow the AF gap.
It's a large format sensor (35mm) which captures a lot of light which means that it works better in low light, without flash. Being mirrorless makes the lenses cheaper because of optics reasons (pro lenses tend to be very expensive).
This is mainly for useful for sports professional photography. It enables you to get some great shots the easy(er) way and sell them to sports news outlets.
Now people with more money than sense will be able to take bad photos faster than ever before.
After autonomous cars will come autonomous cameras--the camera will be a better photographer than you are, so it won't need you to actually operate it. It'll just fly around on a drone. Have its own gallery shows. Win Pulitzers.
DSLRs with mirror mechanisms are now officially a technological dead-end.
This new camera does things that are not possible with DSLR bodies, including SILENT 20FPS shooting, WITHOUT BLACKOUT, WITHOUT DISTORTION FROM ROLLING SHUTTER, and with SHUTTER SPEED UP TO 1/32000 -- very impressive. Sports and other pro photographers that need high-end performance will take notice.
Mirrorless cameras are now clearly the future of pro photography. Canon and Nikon should be very worried.
>This new camera does things that are not possible with DSLR bodies, including SILENT 20FPS shooting, WITHOUT BLACKOUT, WITHOUT DISTORTION FROM ROLLING SHUTTER, and with SHUTTER SPEED UP TO 1/32000 -- very impressive
It's impressive, but it's irrelevant to 99% of photography.
I'd personally rather have an optical viewfinder than all of those features, impressive as they are.
I don't know, - I mean the mirror is bulky and a moving part that can break, but the OVF will be better than EVF in many scenarios.
Cameras with a mirror can shoot with an electronic shutter when needed, but will usually need to do so in "live view" on the rear display - i.e. there is no EVF. Cameras without mirror on the other hand can't use an optical viewfinder, but has an EVF.
Obviously the shutter and fps features of this particular camera are impressive and beats most DSLrs, but there is nothing inherent about DSLr's vs mirrorless that prevents all cameras of both kinds to pull this off soon.
I think the size of mirrorless cameras is a cool feature when you slap on a 35/2.8 on it or similar, so you benefit from the reduced size. Throw on a normal 24-70 zoom lens or similar, and the size difference between a DSLr and a mirrorless is gone.
Where do you read this? I see no mention of a global shutter.
Rolling shutter is a misleading name. It is an attribute of the sensor, not of any mechanical shutter in front of it. It maybe should have been called rolling read-out. The CMOS image sensor is read out, and reset, line by line --- instead of an image being taken by the whole sensor at once (as in a global-shutter sensor). Therefore the image taken by line 2 is a moment later than the image taken by line 1, and so forth.
Global shutter sensors are rare. They don't really cost a lot more, but historically they lose two or more f-stops of exposure latitude and light sensitivity. This is because each photodiode in the sensor is crammed with a bit more circuitry, to store the charge until it is read out, so that a consistent image can be frozen all at once.
Nikon and Canon dominate the pro space for more than just the tech specs of their products. The support is amazing - check out this blog article to see. I thought B&H was close to photographers heaven but I've never seen anything like this.
While 20fps makes nice headline, it is imho the least interesting spec of this camera. Some things I find interesting:
* Low light performance and dynamic range. Sony bodies have traditionally been good at this (see for example https://vimeo.com/99893160), I hope the trend continues.
* Video features. They say 4k full frame video, which sounds nice, but subsampling the sensor inherently comes with some compromises, which might be even exaggerated in 1080p mode.
* There is more to video than just resolution; does it have any high-framerate modes, what sort of video formats and color profiles does it support etc etc.
* The 5 stop equivalent image stabilization sounds impressive. Admittedly I haven't followed the state of art that closely, but I imagined IS being typically closer to 2-3 stop eqv.
* 1/32k shutter speed seems also quite fast. I wonder what sort of new photos such fast shutter speeds enable.
* Wasn't it Sony that "innovated" a lossy compressed RAW format? What sort of impact does that have on this camera?
> They say 4k full frame video, which sounds nice, but subsampling the sensor inherently comes with some compromises, which might be even exaggerated in 1080p mode.
They don't necessarily have to subsample, they may be able to supersample. I believe Panasonic's GH5 does this.
> does it have any high-framerate modes, what sort of video formats and color profiles does it support etc etc.
In terms of high-framerate, it doesn't have anything for 4K but goes up to 120fps in 1080p. Can't see anything about chroma subsampling or bit-depth other than it only outputting 8-bit 4:2:2 through HDMI.
> Wasn't it Sony that "innovated" a lossy compressed RAW format? What sort of impact does that have on this camera?
Yep, though it appears that like the A7RII, you'll be able to disable it. It seems that doing so will roughly halve the number of frames you can take in a single burst and drop the max capture framerate to 12.
> * 1/32k shutter speed seems also quite fast. I wonder what sort of new photos such fast shutter speeds enable.
You can shoot with wide apertures in direct sunlight without using ND filters. Fuji has had this for years now, with much more rolling shutter of course.
Now that I wrote that out, doesn't sound like much. Still, it's been nice not to play around with the filters.
"first Sony camera with an ethernet port. Have to be real time. Shows, presidential debates, every shot I took went right out onto the network as soon as I shot it."
and
"for major UFC events, it’s vital to be able to do a live workflow, where images are constantly going back to an edit station and go out to the world immediately. Not only the ethernet, but the wireless is key for social media outfits all over the world."
If we imagine for a moment that it were 24 or 30fps continuous- could that output be used for video as an alternative to the designated video modes? What would make the results different?
If they finally made auto-focus acceptable, I am willing to dump D750 as my main hyperlapse-creation tool and buy Alpha 9 for travel. Mirrorless always had issues with focus, if the improved quantum efficiency of the sensor allows better focus, they have a winner.
Has Sony fixed their ARW raw file compression story yet? Last I checked, you had a choice between a huge uncompressed raw and a lossy compression technique susceptible to posterization artifacts on high-contrast vertical edges.
That was 12 years ago. The only reason to mention it now is to signal your nerd power level; if you actually care about this you're being absurdly petty.
Just for context, Pacific Gas and Electric (the primary power utility firm in northern California) killed 8 people and destroyed an entire neighborhood a few years back due to their failure to repair a gas pipeline that they knew to be defective.
An unwelcome root kit on your computer is a Bad Thing that it's reasonable to complain about at the time it happens, but as injustices go it's pretty minor. If you're still holding a grudge about it over a decade later then you've been enjoying a very sheltered life.
One complaint I read about Sony mirrorless is a greater tendency to have dust problems due to lack of a mirror. Anyone familiar with that issue and know if it is a real problem?
Lack of a mirror shouldn't affect that; the fact that it is shutterless (which doesn't require being mirrorless; there have been shutterless DSLRs) might.
Where does the A7r II / A7S fit in with this? Are they considered a prosumer version of this camera? And if so, what makes this more professional, the FPS?
Well, Sony has been the "co-king" of consumer P&S cameras for a long time, but those are in steep decline due to ever increasing capabilities of smart phones, where Sony (unlike Canon or Nikon) continues to make money with their Xperia line.
On the high end, they lack one key "ingredient" in my opinion which can be best described by one word: ecosystem. Ask any serious Nikon user and they'll show you a $15K collection of lenses, flashes and even old film bodies with high sentimental value to them. They will also talk for hours about "Nikon approach to color" if you'll listen. Competing against this takes time: Sony needs more lenses, more famous photographers walk around sporting their gear, consistently communicated "vision", etc.
This can also be a tough cultural problem to overcome. I've been shooting Canon on and off most of my life, Nikon gear is very similar in that it feels like a computerized camera system, i.e. a computer is an add-on to an excellent camera helping you take better pictures. Fuji cameras have the same feel. But every time I try Sony it feels like mm... hard to explain, maybe like a "computer which happens to take photos"? Very subjective, of course, but since you asked. ;)
Greater lens affordability/compatibility. If they offered compatibility with Canon glass they'd be unstoppable because there's a lot of that about.
For video Sony is really pulling away from the competition. Outside of niches like sports and nature videography autofocus isn't nearly as important for video as it is for still photography, and nor are super-high-quality lenses - as long as the image is reasonably sharp people actually like the idiosyncrasies of older lenses in many contexts, and in any case it's common to rent lenses you need for a particular project rather than needing to have every option in your bag.
Sony has really been killing it with their low-light capability and ergonomics in recent years, and while you could point to other camera firms that do better in this or that specification area, the fact that Sony is a large global corporation that's very unlikely to go out of business in the foreseeable future is also an asset. I don't own any Sony camera gear myself so not being a fanboy here.
[+] [-] neom|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] EA|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vr46|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] michaelbuddy|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] EA|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] vvanders|9 years ago|reply
With photography it's largely the lens that drives the photo(which makes sense when you think of photographing in terms of painting with light). Until you see Sony breaking out the 300mm F2.8, 400mm F2.8, 600mm F4 and others you won't see much pick-up on the segment they're targeting(1DX, etc). For instance a 400mm F2.8 goes for 2x the cost of this camera alone(~$10k).
There's adapters for EF->Sony, however they're hit and miss on functionality and focusing speed.
[+] [-] wklauss|9 years ago|reply
But yeah, its true. Professionals take to stick to brands for a lot of reasons. Investment already made in lenses, repairability, how easy is to find a colleague during a job that can loan you some missing equipment, etc...
Sony is not going to conquer the professional market overnight, granted, but it's important to have this camera in their catalog to start moving things in that direction.
[+] [-] PuffinBlue|9 years ago|reply
The system as a whole is getting pretty compelling TBH.
Using a camera that can focus track and calculate exposure at over 20fps with nearly 700 auto focus points across almost the whole frame would for sure let me capture stuff I couldn't on any other camera.
And that's not to mention the silent shutter at this speed - I could literally capture photos I wouldn't be allowed to (golf anyone???) with a mechanical and noisy shutter.
Even if I did it on a 500mm f4 and cropped in some of those 24mp!
I'm a Nikon guy (well, I did shoot with the old a900 and some Canon/Olympus stuff too) and I'd certainly consider working very hard to deal with any lens short comings with a camera this capable.
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ghaff|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mabbo|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] salimmadjd|9 years ago|reply
The professional camera industry is going through a paradigm shift. From SLRs (cameras with a mirrors that flap with each photo and make the unique clack sound) to Mirrorless. You needed the mirror during the film days, because you needed to see what the lens was seeing. Now, you can capture what the lens is seeing from the sensor into an electronic viewfinder.
However, there is still an opinion that an SLR (Nikon or Canon) is a real professional tool. From built quality, to focus speed (phase detect), frames/second, battery life, dual card capture, etc.
Sony's new A9 is designed to go head to head against the top of the line professional cameras from Nikon and Canon. At least on many of the specs.
That said, I'm still not convinced it's going to be as robust as a Nikon D5 or Canon's 1Dx, etc.
I'm a Nikon user now (was canon for a long time) and I abuse my camera a lot. From rain, extreme cold, etc. And the camera continues to work. Many of my photographer friends on FB are unhappy with reliability of the Sony's A7 series and switched back to Canon and Nikon due to reliability issues. So even though the A9 has all the specs, it may still not be the camera pros shooting Olympics, etc. switch to.
[+] [-] ckurose|9 years ago|reply
Sports photographers need super fast continuous shooting so you can get 20 shots of that epic catch in one shutter press and choose the best one. Likewise 1/32,000th of a sec shutter speed is twice as fast as most cameras' 1/8,000th of a sec fastest shutter speed, which helps to freeze quick motion.
The high number of AF points is a sports feature too - one area that mirrorless still significantly lags traditional DSLRs is that their AF systems are not as fast as the type used in DSLRs, which have dedicated AF sensors (mirrorless does AF off the imaging sensor), so a ton of AF points is one way mirrorless tries to narrow the AF gap.
[+] [-] visarga|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] petre|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Finnucane|9 years ago|reply
After autonomous cars will come autonomous cameras--the camera will be a better photographer than you are, so it won't need you to actually operate it. It'll just fly around on a drone. Have its own gallery shows. Win Pulitzers.
[+] [-] cs702|9 years ago|reply
This new camera does things that are not possible with DSLR bodies, including SILENT 20FPS shooting, WITHOUT BLACKOUT, WITHOUT DISTORTION FROM ROLLING SHUTTER, and with SHUTTER SPEED UP TO 1/32000 -- very impressive. Sports and other pro photographers that need high-end performance will take notice.
Mirrorless cameras are now clearly the future of pro photography. Canon and Nikon should be very worried.
EDIT: Here's a good first look explaining the importance of all new features: http://briansmith.com/sony-a9-camera-fe-100-400mm-gm-lens-re...
[+] [-] foldr|9 years ago|reply
It's impressive, but it's irrelevant to 99% of photography.
I'd personally rather have an optical viewfinder than all of those features, impressive as they are.
[+] [-] kevin_thibedeau|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alkonaut|9 years ago|reply
Cameras with a mirror can shoot with an electronic shutter when needed, but will usually need to do so in "live view" on the rear display - i.e. there is no EVF. Cameras without mirror on the other hand can't use an optical viewfinder, but has an EVF.
Obviously the shutter and fps features of this particular camera are impressive and beats most DSLrs, but there is nothing inherent about DSLr's vs mirrorless that prevents all cameras of both kinds to pull this off soon.
I think the size of mirrorless cameras is a cool feature when you slap on a 35/2.8 on it or similar, so you benefit from the reduced size. Throw on a normal 24-70 zoom lens or similar, and the size difference between a DSLr and a mirrorless is gone.
[+] [-] combatentropy|9 years ago|reply
Where do you read this? I see no mention of a global shutter.
Rolling shutter is a misleading name. It is an attribute of the sensor, not of any mechanical shutter in front of it. It maybe should have been called rolling read-out. The CMOS image sensor is read out, and reset, line by line --- instead of an image being taken by the whole sensor at once (as in a global-shutter sensor). Therefore the image taken by line 2 is a moment later than the image taken by line 1, and so forth.
Global shutter sensors are rare. They don't really cost a lot more, but historically they lose two or more f-stops of exposure latitude and light sensitivity. This is because each photodiode in the sensor is crammed with a bit more circuitry, to store the charge until it is read out, so that a consistent image can be frozen all at once.
[+] [-] rb808|9 years ago|reply
http://blog.jeffcable.com/2016/08/a-very-rare-look-inside-ca...
Producing the camera that has the best specs doesn't necessarily mean that pros will be using it. (Depends on the size of the gap of course)
[+] [-] zokier|9 years ago|reply
* Low light performance and dynamic range. Sony bodies have traditionally been good at this (see for example https://vimeo.com/99893160), I hope the trend continues.
* Video features. They say 4k full frame video, which sounds nice, but subsampling the sensor inherently comes with some compromises, which might be even exaggerated in 1080p mode.
* There is more to video than just resolution; does it have any high-framerate modes, what sort of video formats and color profiles does it support etc etc.
* The 5 stop equivalent image stabilization sounds impressive. Admittedly I haven't followed the state of art that closely, but I imagined IS being typically closer to 2-3 stop eqv.
* 1/32k shutter speed seems also quite fast. I wonder what sort of new photos such fast shutter speeds enable.
* Wasn't it Sony that "innovated" a lossy compressed RAW format? What sort of impact does that have on this camera?
... and probably some more.
[+] [-] Veratyr|9 years ago|reply
They don't necessarily have to subsample, they may be able to supersample. I believe Panasonic's GH5 does this.
> does it have any high-framerate modes, what sort of video formats and color profiles does it support etc etc.
Full specs, including shooting modes, are here: https://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-camera...
In terms of high-framerate, it doesn't have anything for 4K but goes up to 120fps in 1080p. Can't see anything about chroma subsampling or bit-depth other than it only outputting 8-bit 4:2:2 through HDMI.
> Wasn't it Sony that "innovated" a lossy compressed RAW format? What sort of impact does that have on this camera?
Yep, though it appears that like the A7RII, you'll be able to disable it. It seems that doing so will roughly halve the number of frames you can take in a single burst and drop the max capture framerate to 12.
[+] [-] pvdebbe|9 years ago|reply
You can shoot with wide apertures in direct sunlight without using ND filters. Fuji has had this for years now, with much more rolling shutter of course.
Now that I wrote that out, doesn't sound like much. Still, it's been nice not to play around with the filters.
[+] [-] Veratyr|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] frandroid|9 years ago|reply
!!!
[+] [-] mattpavelle|9 years ago|reply
Add those bandwidth requirements to some of the real-time workflows professionals engage in today (see http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a9/sony-a9A.HTM and the comments around 11:53) such as:
"first Sony camera with an ethernet port. Have to be real time. Shows, presidential debates, every shot I took went right out onto the network as soon as I shot it."
and
"for major UFC events, it’s vital to be able to do a live workflow, where images are constantly going back to an edit station and go out to the world immediately. Not only the ethernet, but the wireless is key for social media outfits all over the world."
and ethernet makes sense.
[+] [-] dluan|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pinum|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bitL|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pklausler|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] appleflaxen|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anigbrowl|9 years ago|reply
Just for context, Pacific Gas and Electric (the primary power utility firm in northern California) killed 8 people and destroyed an entire neighborhood a few years back due to their failure to repair a gas pipeline that they knew to be defective.
An unwelcome root kit on your computer is a Bad Thing that it's reasonable to complain about at the time it happens, but as injustices go it's pretty minor. If you're still holding a grudge about it over a decade later then you've been enjoying a very sheltered life.
[+] [-] gseymour2|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dragonwriter|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] magic5227|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] azhenley|9 years ago|reply
The A9 is more "professional" because of its dual memory card slots, supposedly much better AF, FPS, battery life, and controls (joystick).
[+] [-] imjk|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PuffinBlue|9 years ago|reply
I don't see anything about how weather sealed it is and the press release doesn't mention it either.
[+] [-] Veratyr|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jumpkickhit|9 years ago|reply
Can't afford either one though, but I can dream.
[+] [-] dluan|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] old-gregg|9 years ago|reply
On the high end, they lack one key "ingredient" in my opinion which can be best described by one word: ecosystem. Ask any serious Nikon user and they'll show you a $15K collection of lenses, flashes and even old film bodies with high sentimental value to them. They will also talk for hours about "Nikon approach to color" if you'll listen. Competing against this takes time: Sony needs more lenses, more famous photographers walk around sporting their gear, consistently communicated "vision", etc.
This can also be a tough cultural problem to overcome. I've been shooting Canon on and off most of my life, Nikon gear is very similar in that it feels like a computerized camera system, i.e. a computer is an add-on to an excellent camera helping you take better pictures. Fuji cameras have the same feel. But every time I try Sony it feels like mm... hard to explain, maybe like a "computer which happens to take photos"? Very subjective, of course, but since you asked. ;)
[+] [-] anigbrowl|9 years ago|reply
For video Sony is really pulling away from the competition. Outside of niches like sports and nature videography autofocus isn't nearly as important for video as it is for still photography, and nor are super-high-quality lenses - as long as the image is reasonably sharp people actually like the idiosyncrasies of older lenses in many contexts, and in any case it's common to rent lenses you need for a particular project rather than needing to have every option in your bag.
Sony has really been killing it with their low-light capability and ergonomics in recent years, and while you could point to other camera firms that do better in this or that specification area, the fact that Sony is a large global corporation that's very unlikely to go out of business in the foreseeable future is also an asset. I don't own any Sony camera gear myself so not being a fanboy here.
[+] [-] redial|9 years ago|reply
That and better battery life.
[+] [-] alkonaut|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] bambax|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] gfdgfdg|9 years ago|reply