Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item

SportsShooter.com: The Online Resource for Sports Photography

Contents:
 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Bookshelf
 my.SportsShooter
 Classified Ads
 Workshop
Contests:
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Annual Contest
 Rules/Info
Newsletter:
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
Members:
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
 Join
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions


Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.

Name:



Password:







||
SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board

D3 Vs. Mark III. For thos who switched.
Chris Condon, Photographer, Photo Editor
Ponte Vedra Bch | FL | USA | Posted: 8:22 AM on 06.06.08
->> This thread is aimed at those (former) Canon shooters who have made the switch to Nikon over the Mark III issues. Many people have opinions, but I want real info from those who have actually used both. I know long-time Nikon guys are thrilled, but how does it stack up to what the Canon shooters are used to?
How do you like the D3 as compared to Canon? What features do you love and what do you miss about the Canon system?
Is the D3 "the answer" you expected? Is the color solid? How about DX or "crop" mode... Are the files big enough? Is the motor fast enough in standard mode? Is the focus solid?
Overall, do you feel that making the switch was the best solution, or is there any part of you that thinks you'll regret it when Canon bounces back?
Is it better? How much better?
I've used both and have some opinions, but have not reached a conclusion.
Thanks for your input.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Chris Condon, Photographer, Photo Editor
Ponte Vedra Bch | FL | USA | Posted: 8:25 AM on 06.06.08
->> Whoops... How about "Those who switched"!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 1:58 PM on 06.06.08
->> Obviously there is no "perfect" camera.

I think we can safely assume that Canon will eventually come out with a new camera that will not be as flawed as the Mark III has turned out to be. (Note that the MIII is now over a year old and I think the pro DSLR cycle is about 2 years.)

So those that can't switch, for whatever reason (financial, company issued gear, etc.) patience is what's called for.

There have been numerous reviews of the Nikon D3 and D300 (including a couple of users reports in the Sports Shooter Newsletter) ... and Rob Galbraith in my view is the authority on these matters, especially as it relates to the photojournalism and sports market. His thorough reports on Canon's efforts to "fix" the Mark III have been on the money in most people's opinions.

(Though there are many that say they have no problems with the MIII AF performance and sharpness ---- see Chuck Liddy's writings all over this message board for evidence of that. On the other hand, we recently ran a very compelling piece by Preston Mack on his frustrations with the MIII and subsequent switch from Canon to Nikon.)

Nikon is being very aggressive in getting their cameras and lenses into the hands of working photographers, especially those that are assigned to cover the upcoming Beijing Olympics.

Those photographers that are in a sort of "No Man's Land" --- going back and forth between personally owned/company issued Canon equipment and shooting with Nikon "Test Drive" cameras and lenses --- their opinions would be of particular interest in this thread's endeavor to compare systems. They would have direct comparisons because they are using both systems at the same time.

I don't like to see the dreaded "Canon Vs. Nikon" threads like most and I think we're all pretty tired of Canon Bashing/Nikon Bashing here.

But the observations of the photographers that are using both systems or recently went from one to the other would be of particular interest I think.

Mahalo!
 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Doug Thompson, Photographer
Floyd | VA | | Posted: 8:28 AM on 06.07.08
->> As Robert points out, there is no perfect camera. Most of us have different shooting needs, differing styles and different expectations.

I shot with Nikons for 40 years, from my first "F" in 1964 to the D2H in 2004. I switched to Canon as my primary shooting gear in 2004 because of the noise issues on the D2H but kept most of my Nikon glass in the hope that my camera of choice for four decades would make a comeback.

Became an avid fan of Canon over the past four years, especially the long glass like the 400/F2.8. I did not have the same focusing problems as others on the MK III. The only glitch came when the first MK III went in for the mirror upgrade and came back brain dead with the Err 99. CPS replaced the shutter and logic board and it has worked flawlessly ever since.

The high praise of the D3 prompted an order for one just before our state basketball tournaments this year. Dug out my non-DX Nikon glass and used the D3 alongside my MK 111s. The D3 died halfway through the state finals with an "Err" message. Up until that the camera fulfilled all expectations.

NPS fixed the problem and I continued to use the D3 for spring sports alongside the Mark IIIs. The only problem was readjusting to a Nikon after four years with Canons.

The D3 is an incredible camera. In many ways it's the F5 of digital bodies. The focus is fast and sharp and the noise at high ISOs unbelievably low.

But the Mark III is a solid professional camera as well. True, I've been one of the lucky ones who didn't get a lemon with focusing problems. If I had run into the same problems as others, I might hold a different opinion. The images at ISOs up to 6400 on the Mark III are, in my opinion, as low in noise as the D3. The D3's images above 6400 have not, in my experience, been usable.

In the end, I've decided to stick with the Mark III for my primary gear, but will hold on the D3 as well. The deciding factor, more than anything else, may be Canon's long glass. The 400/f2.8 is my favorite action lens. I didn't own a Nikkor 400 before but borrowed one to test and it just didn't seem as sharp or responsive as the Canon. I have a 1Ds MK II for full frame work, when needed, and expect to replace it soon with the MK III version.

If I had not invested so heavily in Canon glass over the past four years I might have decided to switch back to Nikon. The D3, as noted, is a fantastic camera. But changing now would require buying a second D3 body and a 400mm Nikkor lens (along with some other accessories) to match the Canon setup. That cost alone is more than the price of a 1Ds Mark III I plan to order soon.

This, however, is just one man's decision based on one man's experiences and one man's set of needs and expectations.
 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ron Manfredi, Photographer
Merrick (Long Island) | NY | | Posted: 9:34 AM on 06.07.08
->> Doug,

Thank you for your personal insight into the two cameras. I would be curious to read other first-hand reports such as yours from others in "No Man's Land".

The potential problems with the Canon have been known and discussed; while Nikon's high-ISO ability is one of the first things touted about it. I have not read much about the Mark III's high-ISO capability until your report. To me, the few good on-line full-resolution comparison photos appear to put them pretty close at even at 6400. (For acutal 'real-world' use in reproduction; not for pixel-peeping!) It appears you find that to be true also.

While I am not quite as heavily invested in glass as you, it would still be a major expenditure for me to switch over, so I will either consider adding a Mark III, or waiting for the "improved 'N' version.

As Robert said, "...patience is called for."
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Greg Ferguson, Photographer
Scottsdale | Az | USA | Posted: 10:25 PM on 06.07.08
->> Doug, I agree with Ron, thank you for your comments.

I'd like to hear from people who are using both in hot weather and bright sun, which I have in abundance and is 'sposed to bring out the worst in the Mk III. I am in 100+ weather way too much to trust a body with the Mk III's record for warm and sunny conditions. I need to hear that the body is working right every time, not some or most of the time.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Robert Beck, Photographer
Carlsbad | CA | USA | Posted: 1:20 AM on 06.08.08
->> Many events we shoot are now under the lights. The exceptional Nikon files in low light conditions should be reason enough to switch. Let me know how many more reasons you need.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 1:29 AM on 06.08.08
->> My experience, I would not say that the Mark III at 6400 is "pretty close" to the D3.

I would say ... not even close is more accurate. The D3 kicks the MIII's ass at high iso/low light shooting.

Mahalo!
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Greg Ferguson, Photographer
Scottsdale | Az | USA | Posted: 2:47 AM on 06.08.08
->> Low noise at high ISO is nice, but how is the D3 at low-light focusing and focus tracking? If we're having to use 6400 ISO, that means the light levels stink, so is the D3 only good for slow moving or stationary objects at that point, or can it acquire focus lock quickly and reliably with a subject that has reasonable contrast in what they're wearing?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Doug Thompson, Photographer
Floyd | VA | | Posted: 7:09 AM on 06.08.08
->> "I'd like to hear from people who are using both in hot weather and bright sun, which I have in abundance and is 'sposed to bring out the worst in the Mk III."

Greg, shot softball in 93-degree and bright sun conditions Saturday (with humidity to match). No focusing problems with either Mark III. The oldest has the mirror update and the second was a blue dot. Both have the latest firmware. Shooting from the outfield with a 400 and a 1.4 tele-extender, I tracked three oncoming base steals from first to second without a single out of focus shot.

As far as low light goes, I can only speak from my experience, which has been that I see little difference between the the D3 or Mk III at 6400. In camera settings might have something to do with those who get better results from the D3. I can't speak to that. I usually shoot with in-camera sharpening and noise reduction turned off or at the lowest settings and shoot at 6400 for indoor work with the Mark IIIs all the time. Shot a music concert with the MK IIIs at 6400 Friday night and didn't need Noise Ninja on a single frame. The first two shots on my Member Page were shot at a state basketball tournament this year with Mark IIIs at 6400. No NN on either. The third was shot with a pre-blue dot Mark III before the mirror update on an unseasonably-hot and humid 88-degree day with bright sun at the state golf tournament last October. No focusing problems that day either.

But others don't get the same results, which suggests Canon's quality control is not consistent on the Mark III. Perhaps my D3 needs tweaking from NPS. Perhaps I'm more adept with in-camera settings on the Mark III than the D3. Rob Galbraith tried a number of Mark IIIs and never found one that performed to the level he expected. Others here have had good results with a Mark III right out of the box. There are so many variables and so many customized settings and such different expectations that a definitive answer may be impossible.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

John Cheng, Photographer
New Milford | CT | USA | Posted: 7:58 AM on 06.08.08
->> 90% of what I shoot is gymnastics. After receiving an evaluation kit from NPS, I pretty much did a 1:1 switch from MKIII to D3. Not all the meets I cover are the premier events with TV lighting. In fact most of the meets are ISO6400, 1/400 and f2.8 in dungeons around here. The image quality of the MKIII is much better than the MKII at above ISO1600 in terms of noise and color. AF performance was the same for me in terms of keeper ratio between MKII and MKIII, but the initial AF lock was definitely faster. So I was fairly content with my Canon setup. But after shooting the D3, 200/2 and 70-200VR for about a month, the keeper ratio went up, images above ISO3200 looked much much better with the D3, not to mention little loss in sharpness, parents bought more pictures, I sold more re-prints...etc. Customers wouldn't know why, but they just know the pictures look different and better.

I guess I learned to accept and live with the limitations of the MKIII until D3 came along. Here are some quick comparisons:

- D3 Initial AF lock is a tad slower than the MKIII in low light with 9 or 21 dynamic AF.
- Once AF locks on, 99% of the time the entire sequence is in focus
- Leo colors I had problem tracking before with the MKIII, such as all pink, wasn't an issue with the D3
- Image quality below ISO3200 between 1D MKIII, D3 and 1Ds MKIII are essentially equal
- At ISO6400 image quality of D3 > 1D MKIII > 1Ds MKIII
- Auto White Balance on the D3 is more accurate than MKIII
- Everything is backwards on the Nikon. The zoom ring turns the opposite direction and that takes a while to get used to.
- After shooting FX it's difficult to go back to 1.5 crop. You realize how much of the sensor you're NOT using when in 1.5x mode. 9FPS at FX is fast enough for me
- The viewfinder on the 1Ds is brighter and bigger than the D3
- 12MP is plenty for sports but for studio portrait work 1Ds with 22MP is still the KING!
- The ability to create folders in camera out of sequence is nice. You couldn't create 200EOS1D without creating the first 199 folders on the 1D.
- D3 with 70-200 is lighter than 1D with 70-200
- Auto-ISO is cool. Set aperture and shutter speed to manual and let auto-iso float. Worked really well in baseball the other day with tricky lighting.
- 24-70 is sharper than its Canon equivalent
- 14-24 is amazingly sharp. It's great for venue shots.
- love the LCD on the D3
- Did I mention I love the LCD on the D3?

I switched from:

1D MarkIII x 2
1Ds MarkIII
15/2.8 FE
85/1.8
24-70/2.8
70-200/2.8
200/1.8
400/2.8
1.4TC

to:

D3 x 2
D300 with battery grip
85/1.4
14-24
24-70
70-200
200/2
400/2.8
1.4 TC

The one lens that I missed the most is the 200/1.8. I felt like I was sending off one of my kids to college when I sold it. 200/2 fills in the shoe nicely but the 200/1.8 is just such a special lens.

I just returned from Boston covering the Women's VISA Championships for USA Gymnastics. It was the the first premier event that I used all Nikon gear. Needless to say, they performed flawlessly. Of course took some grief from all the Canon shooters, but it was all in good fun... :-)

-John
 This post is:  Informative (3) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Rob Ostermaier, Photographer
Newport News | VA | USA | Posted: 9:27 AM on 06.08.08
->> Hey, I have an idea. Lets all agree to stop talking about equipment and start making good pictures with said equipment!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (7) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 11:49 AM on 06.08.08
->> Under ordinary circumstances I might tend to agree with you.

But when the leading maker of the system that a majority of photojournalists and sports photographers use has as big and public of a problem as Canon has since the introduction of the Mark III, I think it's a valid topic for photographers to carry on.

When one of the tools of our profession is as deeply flawed as this has been for the past year --- add to that many frustrated professionals are switching systems, considering switching systems or would like to switch systems (because of the MIII's problems) --- I think a good discussion of this is fine.

We depend on our cameras and lenses to perform at a high level so we can do our jobs. If a member here wants to find out opinions and facts about the tools he is using and get opinions of courses of action, as long as this discussion is professional, contains useful information, provides some personal insight and is on topic --- what's the problem?

Topics on forums can be hijacked and turn petty, uninformative and useless. But it is up to the members here to maintain a quality and standard so these wonderful features that Grover, Burf and Brad have provided us can be useful in our lives, careers and our photography.

Mahalo!
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Rob Ostermaier, Photographer
Newport News | VA | USA | Posted: 3:34 PM on 06.08.08
->> It's a valid topic. I'm not saying it's not. It seems we talk about it endlessly. Canon MarkIII sucks and the Nikon D3 rules the universe. I got it. By the end of the year there will be a Canon MarkIIIn that will blow the doors off anything. Bresson could take a better picture than me and most of the people on this site at 1 frame a second. I've always believed it's the artist not the tool.

My out-of-date MarkIIn still kicks ass.:)

Just trying to make a point.

Continue to discuss.

Sorry if I offended.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (1) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Doug Thompson, Photographer
Floyd | VA | | Posted: 7:36 PM on 06.08.08
->> "It's a valid topic. I'm not saying it's not. It seems we talk about it endlessly. Canon MarkIII sucks and the Nikon D3 rules the universe. I got it. By the end of the year there will be a Canon MarkIIIn that will blow the doors off anything. Bresson could take a better picture than me and most of the people on this site at 1 frame a second. I've always believed it's the artist not the tool."

Rob, you make a valid point as well and one worthy of discussion in another thread. There are valid reasons to discuss the performance of a camera that many expected to set the standard but failed to meet expectations. That fact that some of us have had Mark IIIs that have performed as expected and others have not still lead me to believe this is a quality control issue more than a design flaw.

But as someone who began his career with a meterless Nikon F, fixed focal length manual focus Nikkor lenses, Tri-X and a Luna Pro for metering I wonder if we haven't become too dependent on letting our equipment do our work for us. Yes, 10 fps and rapid auto focusing allows one to capture more images and 16 GB CF cards allow us to shoot all day and mot reload. Yet I find that my best shots often come in single shot mode and not in the middle of a 10fps burst.

What we offer our clients and employers are the eye that composes the shot and the timing to press the shutter at the precise second.

In the book, The Eye of Eisenstadt, Arthur Goldsmith tells of the time Eisenstadt was shooting in Times Square when woman approached him with her son.

"Mr. Eisenstadt," she asked, "if I buy my son a camera like yours can he take pictures like you."

Replied Eisensadt:

"If you buy him a Steinway, can he play like Van Cliburn?"

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Chris Condon, Photographer, Photo Editor
Ponte Vedra Bch | FL | USA | Posted: 9:16 AM on 06.09.08
->> Thanks to everyone who responded. I know this has been a topic of much discussion and I hate the fact that it has to be a Canon Vs. Nikon debate.
I also am well aware that the tools don't make the artist, but the tools should never inhibit one's vision.
Personally, I make enough mistakes on my own without my equipment adding another variable!
As far as: "Canon MarkIII sucks and the Nikon D3 rules the universe." I don't necessarily agree. I know that there have been inconsistencies with the Mark III and I have had my own issues. Have they been bad enough to warrant dumping many thousands of $$ worth of gear? Maybe, maybe not.
I've been using the D3 for a few weeks and really do like the system. I like the speed of the motor in crop mode, but I still think those files are a bit small. I'm still figuring out what white balance and color settings work best for natural reproduction.
The TTL is excellent as I expected (I shot Nikon for years). I don't shoot a ton of low-light work, but I was very pleased with both the the Mark III and D3 in high-iso's
I'm fortunate in that my Mark III's have not been as bad as some, but have had the occasional hiccup.
I'm not sure that switching systems right now makes sense for us, but I can see how some people have benefitted.
I like the Nikons, but I see then as incrementally better not exponentially for what I shoot.
We're still on the fence, and I feel really bad for the non-staff shooters who have to decide how big a hit is worth taking to switch right now.
I think if it were my $$ on the line, I'd stick to Canon and use my Mark IIn's until the next body comes out!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Tom Theobald, Photographer
La Mesa | CA | USA | Posted: 6:23 AM on 06.10.08
->> Yes agree, very valuable thread...
Especially John Cheng's comparisons (thanks John!) as we cover almost same sports.

I've waited and watched Canon's pro body situation for a year now and finally by June, took delivery of a 1Ds MKIII (blue dot). Then headed to Torino last week to cover a European Championship. Felt pretty confident the 1Ds MKIII's AF would be good and was relieved and happy in Italy. So much so, quickly became apparent, my MKIIn won't be in my bag much longer. High fps speed is just not so important to me (trigger mostly individual frames here anyhow)...

Ok, am working there in Italy and I notice for first time in like 15-years, the mix of Canon to Nikon bodies to be approx 50/50 (of 30+ photogs at Palasport Olimpico). So I began to quiz the Italian pros with D3's, how goes for them...and all went thumbs up. I found quick one Italian pro, who went from Canon->Nikon D3 a few months back and picked his brain for couple minutes (thumbs up also).

When I received my 1Ds MKIII before flying to Italy, I asked my local dealer howz going re D3 & MKIII photogs here in my region. He said to me, "Ya know Tom, several pros are running both Nikon AND Canon now" (local NFL team photog etc). Yet like Doug above, I am also crazy about my Canon 400/2.8 and just no way can give up that glass. Mates, there are certain advantages to BOTH SYSTEMS. In short, have decided I will return to Nikon and run both again. In 2003, I was in "No Man's Land" for a year and no worries, your brain gets used to it. So keeping 1Ds MKIII, exit my MKIIn and here comes D3. YMMV, these are tools-->the image is what matters
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Luke Trottier, Photographer
Bath | ME | US | Posted: 7:13 AM on 06.10.08
->> I think people that are on the fence between switching are just bored and want a new toy....
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jeff Brehm, Photographer, Photo Editor
Charlotte | NC | USA | Posted: 6:34 PM on 06.10.08
->> I'd love to have the Mk III's features ... but I've waited a year and I'm still not satisfied all the bugs are out of it. At this point, (IMO) I have four options:

1.) Take my chances and buy one (not likely, given Canon's behavior);

2.) Wait for the next one from Canon, give it a another year and then buy it if there are not hundreds of more screaming threads (which means using my MkIIn for at least two more years -- argh!);

3.) Take the same financial bath I did two years ago and switch back to Nikon (also not likely, although I really miss Nikon flash quality);

4.) Hope Nikon comes up with something even better than the D3 in the next two years, something so good I throw caution (and my money) to the winds and switch back.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Greg Ferguson, Photographer
Scottsdale | Az | USA | Posted: 1:54 AM on 06.11.08
->> Jeff, we're both thinking the same way, except I held out and didn't go to the Mk II for the same reasons I held out on the Mk III. My 1D works better with strobes because of its 1/500 sync speed, and I needed reliable focusing that isn't going to have problems when its hot.

But, my 1D is getting tired. I'll probably need to send it in soon for another CLA and to have them give me an estimate on the remaining life on the shutter. If the shutter goes it'll go as it probably won't be worth replacing.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Alex Boyce, Photographer
central italy | n/a | italy | Posted: 7:24 PM on 06.11.08
->> Pro s in italy have been using nikon because in italy it is a snob thing, nikon is seen as a better camera even when it was not good iso wise etc before with d2hs. In fact it is very hard not to over estimate the snob factor of NIKON in ITaly.... So although they all have D3's even if they all had d40x's they would say the same thing, ive been working here for ages and know this. Italy has a Nikon mafia.... the first question you get asked is why you shoot canon by someone with a nikon, my first answer is i dont care....

Really even if canon had a camera that was 10 times better they would still rather drown with a nikon here....
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Greg Ferguson, Photographer
Scottsdale | Az | USA | Posted: 8:08 PM on 06.11.08
->> So you're saying they'd rather be hung with a Nikon rope? :-)
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jay Adeff, Photographer
Salinas | CA | USA | Posted: 4:42 PM on 06.12.08
->> What do you expect? They can't even give up on Berlusconi, no matter how shady he may be...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Add your comments...
If you'd like to add your comments to this thread, use this form. You need to be an active (paying) member of SportsShooter.com in order to post messages to the system.

NOTE: If you would like to report a problem you've found within the SportsShooter.com website, please let us know via the 'Contact Us' form, which alerts us immediately. It is not guaranteed that a member of the staff will see your message board post.
Thread Title: D3 Vs. Mark III. For thos who switched.
Thread Started By: Chris Condon
Message:
Member Login:
Password:




Return to -->
Message Board Main Index
Who's the only current U.S. Gymnastics Team member to attend college? Find out here ::..