sallydouglas Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Hi Everyone... I have been asking questions about Nikon gear for a while now, as it was my assumption that Nikon make the best cameras and lenses... But today, I have had a conversation with a pro, who suggested to me that Canon equipment has overtaken Nikon in price, quality and popularity... He said that MOST professional photographers these days prefer Canon over Nikon for image quality... He also suggested that the Nikon name has fallen from grace considerably over the last few years, and more and more rapidly Canon is becoming the number one choice for professional photographers... This poses a predicament for me, as I am at the stage in my photography where I am nearly ready to update all my gear to professional standards... I currently have a Nikon D70, but want to get a more advanced body, new zoom lenses, and a couple of really good prime lenses... I am now in a total quandry about all this, so thought it best to ask as many photographers as I can the questions 1) what is their choice of camera 2) why have they made this choice 3) is the image quality from a Canon superior to a Nikon... The problem I have with the D70 is it is extremely difficult to get good crisp shots off the tripod in low light... It constantly frustrates me, as I miss shots that I could achieve with more advanced gear... I dont want to go out and buy all new Nikon equipment only to find out that Canon is superior... Please help me in clarifying this situation... Many thanks... Sally...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Stick with Nikon. Until a few years ago, it was clear that Canon had some advantages in the DSLR arena, but Nikon has really been whooping their asses lately. I'm sure Canon will come back.</p> <p>If I was just starting out, though, I'd be taking an awfully hard look at Sony and Pentax as in-body stabilization is really handy.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andylynn Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>That's crap, for two reasons:<br> -It's not true.<br> -It doesn't matter to you.</p> <p>Not being a pro, you're not shopping for the same equipment pros are, so ignore what they do and look at the better consumer equipment. Start by looking at the D90 or D5000, and a flash. No Canon that's not full-frame is better in low light.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnw63 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Sally,</p> <p>With the exception of the noise level at higher ISOs, the D70 is not any harder to get sharp pictures than any OTHER camera, no matter what brand. Yes, newer bodies have better sensors that allow less noise at high ISO numbers. Some of the new consumer or what is called "prosumer" cameras have better high ISO perfomance than Pro gear of only a few years ago. Please remember that getting "pro gear" will NOT make your shots "pro" caliber without the experience that makes you a pro.</p> <p>As far as the Nikon vs Canon... Don't buy into it. Some of each brand is best for certain types of photography. They try to out do eachother, up and down the product line. Can anyone tell if any shot is made on a Nikon or a Canon after the fact ? No. For a while, Canon had the best, al be it high priced, landscape camera. Now, with the D3x, Nikon can probably clame that title. The next announcement from Canon may mix things up once again.</p> <p>The best advice is to buy into the camera SYSTEM that has the gear that suits YOUR style the best. Do you like one brands controls over another ? Does one brand have the best lenses for your specific style ? Does one brand have a better flash system, if you need that sort of thing. What about AF speed and accuracy ? Often, it is said that Nikon has a more accurate AF than Canon, but perhaps a little slower. All of which can change in less than a year.<br> Neither is notably better than the other, unless you have a VERY specific need that one fits the best. For all around stuff, there is no winner.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobcossar Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>And the age-old answer........All the majors make better gear......features differ, but any image difference is all about <strong>you</strong> , NOT about the name plate. You <strong>can</strong> trust the gear to deliver. It's you, me and everyone else that needs work....regards, Bob</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Michael Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Essentially you are buying into a System, you are not buying a camera. The "difference" for you could be how the menus system works<br> <br> What John Williamson wrote . . . I agree.<br> <br> I wouldn't take much notice of Pros that say to someone beginning that, universally one system is better than another as a blanket statement - in fact I would question their ability behind (any) camera - if they did.<br> <br> Also - I doubt buying new gear will enable you to magically get good crisp shots with on a tripod in low light - I suspect that is technique rather than your D70. I encourage you to seek answers in that regard<br> <br> <br> <br> WW<br> </p> <p > </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_sullivan Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>yep Nikon or Canon.....they are the two systems worth looking at. Which one is better? Not that other manufacturers stuff is crap.....it's just that Nikon and Canon have the largest systems....all kinds of accessories....and they tend to be first at new stuff. Like said above....the one that works best for you is the best for you. I'd stay with Nikon, seeing as you started ther....and that comes from a Canon owner, by the way....heh.</p> <p>As for sharp pics in low light hand held....a few guidelines. Take the lens you have on the camera and see what the focal length is....if it's a zoom, see what focal length you have set for the pic you're taking. Take the reciprocal of that number and that is the slowest shutterspeed you should use with that lens in that light.....ie 50mm lens....shutterspeed = no slower than 1/50th of a second. This is a guideline! But it's a start.</p> <p>Next....holding the cam....left hand (palm up) UNDER the cam body with lefthand fingers supporting the lens. Right hand of course holding rh side of cam. both elbows tucked into your body, or on sturdy surface spread apart. The idea is your two elbows and your two hands form a triangle.....the most steady of geometric shapes.</p> <p>Next.....you SQUEEZE the shutterbutton...not slam it down. When trying to time the shot, press shutterbutton down half way and squeeze off the shot the rest of way at appropriate moment. Ever fired a rifle or gun? you squeeze the trigger....same for "shooting" with a camera.</p> <p>and a little tip from a low light photographer.....use shutter burst mode for your shutter. The idea is to burst 2 or 3 pics of same suject. The first shot , even with using the above techniques, can be blurred because you just moved because of having to press the shutterbutton. By the time the second shot is taken, you're settled in, not moving anything, and a lot of times that shot is noticably sharper than the first shot. The 3rd shot don't matter...I just take it so moving my finger to release the shutter on the second shot might again move the cam and cause blur.</p> <p>And then there is really low light...........where you cant possibly take a sharp pic, even at ISOs of 6400. Shoot it anyhow.....sometimes blur is less important than the shot itself.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brett_w. Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>"But today, I have had a conversation with a pro, who suggested to me that Canon equipment has overtaken Nikon in price, quality and popularity... He said that MOST professional photographers these days prefer Canon over Nikon for image quality... He also suggested that the Nikon name has fallen from grace considerably over the last few years, and more and more rapidly Canon is becoming the number one choice for professional photographers..."<br> sad isn't it? I remember the days when the Nikon was good ...<br> it is amazing how the Canon "Rebel" series can get good "crisp" shots in low light with inexpensive lens</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis_g Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p> Not Nikon v. Canon again, please. Tomorrow you'll have a conversation with another pro who'll sing Nikon's praises, and then what? Neither is superior. There is no predicament. Choose a camera that fits your hands well, whose controls fall to hand, and whose menus seem intuitive to you.</p> <p> One more thing: This site has extensive archives where this question has been asked in one form or another a zillion times. If you want many more opinions on the subject, do a search.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin_delson Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>This is easy. Nikon is better. No wait; Canon..umm, no...Nikon I think.</p> <p>It's interesting when I look at finished products of the shoot, I nor any other pro can tell you which cam took the image. Most can't even tell you if it was DX or FX for that matter.</p> <p>Also of interest is how most of what we consider top images were taken years ago with film; some with 35mm, some with MF.</p> <p>This "age old" arguement grows old rapidly.</p> <blockquote> <p>It constantly frustrates me, as I miss shots that I could achieve with more advanced gear</p> </blockquote> <p>..and no matter what tennis racket I buy, I will never make shots like Pete Sampras.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pk photography Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Here we go again. This is a never ending battle. It will always be that one seems better than the other until something new comes out then the other is better. This battle between brands will never end, just do a search on PN and you will see what I mean.</p> <p><strong>"The problem I have with the D70 is it is extremely difficult to get good crisp shots off the tripod in low light... It constantly frustrates me, as I miss shots that I could achieve with more advanced gear".</strong><br> I agree with William and Thomas, it probably is not your D70 but possibly your lens or maybe camera shake. I know someone who uses a D70 to this day and his low light photos are beautifully crisp.</p> <p>Don't take this the wrong way, but how would you know that you can achieve this with an advanced model without testing this theory out first. Keep in mind that it is not the make/model that makes the photo it is the photographer and no matter what camera someone has they could still end up with un-crisp photos even if it is "top of the line pro gear".</p> <p>A few things to consider when looking to upgrade your gear. <br> 1) How does it feel in your hands? This one is most important and you should handle them all to find the best fit.<br> 2) Would you like to keep and use the lenses you currently have? It may save you money, unless of course money is no object.<br> 3) What features do you REALLY need? Don't buy something if you are not going to use it.</p> <p>No one here albeit Nikon or Canon users can tell you what YOU should buy, it is all about comfort, features, and glass. You will need to do some personal research compare the models you think you may want and then visit your local camera shop and handle them. Or better yet rent them and actually use them for a day or two.</p> <p>If you are actually looking to upgrade to a "pro" camera then what ever you do, do not buy into the whole popularity thing. Prices go up and down with every new camera that comes out; so this should not be a factor. Quality, well this is the fight that will never end.</p> <p><strong>"But today, I have had a conversation with a pro, who suggested to me that Canon equipment has overtaken Nikon in price, quality and popularity".</strong><br> I take it that this pro uses a Canon model. Did you ask him what else he owns or has used? And if so can he show you proof of the quality difference between Nikon and Canon? This reason I ask this is because; most of the pros I know usually started out with a certain Brand and it was just easier to keep that brand (due to the amount of glass they had and the knowledge of the system) then to switch and start over again (big financial gulp). Now don't get me wrong here I do know a couple that actually did the switch, one was a Canon user switched to Nikon and the other was just the opposite, but you will find that most will tell you that they have used one or the other since the beginning and have stuck with it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
railphotog Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>I'm a lifelong Canon user, but would suggest you stick with Nikon. You already have one and I assume you are comfortable with it. Just upgrade the body and/or lens(es) and keep what you have as backup. There is no magic bullet/brand that will greatly improve anyone's photography.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerry_grim Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p >That pro photographer is talking maybe 4 or 5 years ago. At that time Canon was very progressive and Nikon seemingly did little with new equipment. Now, Nikon is doing extremely well and arguably has leap-fogged Canon with their bodies. Canon does have more super telephotos and they are cheaper in price than Nikon. But, Nikon does have enough super telephotos for professional sports and photographers. But should this matter at all for the average enthusiast? No.</p> <p > </p> <p > </p> <p >I switched to Canon at that time because I was in the market for new equipment and Canon fit the bill at that time. Now, it would be harder to switch and I do not recommend one brand over another. I agree with Andrew Robertson’s advice in sticking with Nikon. And I agree, if starting out to take a look at Sony and Pentax. When you consider how small a company Nikon is compared to Canon, Nikon is just amazing.</p> <p > </p> <p > </p> <p >I would not change brands simply because of low light photos not being sharp as you like. That could easily be your technique. Also, most zooms will not be at their sharpest at maximum aperture and may be quite soft. Every brand has lenses in that category.</p> <p > </p> <p >Consider posting a photo on this, or Nikon forum along with the EXIF information. There are many things to cause unsharp photos that you describe, like incorrect focus, not-so-good post processing, taking the photos without mirror lockup and self timer, etc. etc.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCL Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>It's irrelevant which brand. The bottom line, which dealers, manufacturers and marketers don't tell you is "you need to work on your technique". Plain and simple. This is not a criticism of what technique you have developed so for, rather an encouragement for you to double your efforts...more practice, perhaps some more learning either thru books or classes, and practice, practice, practice. It really is true....cameras don't make the pictures, photographers do. Almost any camera out there can produce professional results in the hands of a master.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_goren Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Sally,</p> <p>Nikon makes great gear. Canon makes great gear.</p> <p>While it’s true that Canon is subtly better suited to certain kinds of photography, and Nikon to others, it’s even more true that, if you have to ask which is which, then you’re not doing the kind of photography where one has an edge over the other.</p> <p>In other words, if you have to ask, then it really doesn’t matter which you pick, as both will be superlative.</p> <p>If you ever progress to the point that the differences become significant, then you’ll be well aware of which is better and why. Further, the business or artistic reasons for switching (if you picked the “worng” one) will be clear, and the financial cost in doing so will be a minor part of the equation.</p> <p>If you were just starting out, I would recommend physically handling cameras from both manufacturers and playing with the controls. One or the other will feel more comfortable, and that feel will carry through the rest of that manufacturer’s line. Being comfortable with your gear is much more important than the truly miniscule performance differences between the two systems. If one system is a better fit for you than the other, then that’s the most important consideration right there.</p> <p>Since you’re already comfortable with Nikon, I’d strongly suggest sticking with them unless you have a very compelling reason to switch. I write that as a dedicated Canon user who is tickled pink with Canon gear and has no intention whatsoever of ever switching.</p> <p>Cheers,</p> <p>b&</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sallydouglas Posted October 17, 2009 Author Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Hi Everyone...<br> To the many who have offered me solid, constructive advice, I am most grateful and thank you deeply for taking the time to answer...(Especially you Thomas Sullivan)...<br> To those few who offered nothing but smart alec, sarcastic comments, which lack both knowledge and decorum, you can bugger off!!!... I am only new to photography, and am trying to learn and develop the best I can... I don't have much knowledge or experience, and I am highly offended that you would belittle my attempts at learning and seeking advice...If you have nothing decent to bring to the table, dont come to dinner!!!...<br> After some research and the gathered opinions from some great photographers on PhotoNet, I have decided to stay with Nikon, as I really love the feel of my D70...<br> Thanks again... Best wishes... Sally...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_h3 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p><strong>I had the <em>exact</em> same dilemma</strong> , and here's what I did: Thanks to my D70 and its auto-ISO, I recently blew some magnificent landscape photo opportunities. The D70 can shoot some truly lousy looking stuff at high ISOs-- and if you're not careful with the menus, it can keep the high ISO settings-- and blow the white balance to boot. <em><strong>If only I had a D90 or a better DSLR</strong> </em> , I thought!<br><br /> Then I figured, what the heck-- why not switch to Canon? I started shopping, asking, and researching. Everybody had an opinion. My D70 was fine for portraits, travel memories, and controlled lighting. But I wanted something that would do those things-- plus be more simple and fool-proof in wilderness situations with ever-changing natural light. I wanted gear smart enough to let me concentrate on composition.<em> Instead of buying new gear, here's what I did:</em><br><br /> I cleaned up my old trusty F5-- a film legend that can now be had for a fraction of the price of a decent DSLR. I've started shooting Velvia and Reala-- and am working on my technique. Film avoids ISO and white balance issues entirely-- and scans made from my F5/Reala combo look every bit as sharp and colorful as the output from Nikon & Canon's finest full-frame DSLRs. At least on the landscapes and natural scenes that I enjoy shooting.<br><br /> I know that I will buy another DSLR body eventually. For now, I think I have found a much more productive way to improve my knowledge and technique. This may not be everybody's cup of tea. But I post it here just to point out that there <em>are</em> alternatives to going on a gear quest.</p><p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Nikon versus Canon debates will go on forever. It is like asking if a GM or Ford is better to haul manure; or if All is better than Tide laundry detergent.<br> With photography LIGHTING really is often what matters; but folks dwell on brand names of camera gear.<br> One can buy a Leica M9 ; M8 or an Epson RD-1 and used old LTM Nikkors or Canon lenses and have both! :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>This is really over the top. It is as untrue to say that Nikon is ahead of Canon right now as it is to say the opposite. It, as we <em>have</em> to say, "all depends."</p> <p>At any given moment, "leadership" is a matter of a few more pixels here or there. If you're invested in Nikon equipment, that's where you should stay.</p> <p>The only reason to switch that I can see would be if at some particular time, you absolutely needed some technology that was only available on one or the other. In architectural work, it might be the TSE-17mm on the Canon, or the hi-def video, but as you can see if you follow the ups and downs of "leadership", you only need to switch if the temporary advantage is "mission critical"--if you can't do your job without it, and you need it right now.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <blockquote> <p>To those few who offered nothing but smart alec, sarcastic comments, which lack both knowledge and decorum, you can bugger off!!!...</p> </blockquote> <p>Those who are easily offended, will be offended often.</p> <p><strong><em>You</em> </strong> need to look at the hints on how to overcome this liability at (<a href="http://www.ehow.com/how_2078115_overcome-being-easily-offended.html">link</a> ). Complaints about decorum from folks who tell others to "bugger off" are a little, well, you know. I really don't see what in the various messages was not relevant to your naive post--which as some pointed out, would have been substantially different had you made the slightest effort to research the issue by Googling the issue here on this website or in general.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c._f. Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p><strong>My $0.02</strong><br> I have a pleasure of freelancing for many studios thus I end up using, at times, their equipment.<br> Digital Equipment I have used or currently use:</p> <ul> <li>Nikon: d70, d100, d200, d50, d90, d300</li> <li>Canon: 20d, 40d, 50d, 5d, 5dMii, 1dMiii</li> </ul> <p>Personal preference Nikon and <strong>only</strong> b/c of the ergonomics of the body design.<br> Image quality and ease of use on both is AMAZING. One isn't better then the other. Canon is a <em>bit</em> cheaper then Nikon though.<br> All of the "comparisons" that I've seen over the years are EXTREMELY subjective. Therefore, once again its is all about personal preference.<br> A <strong>true</strong> photographer that says otherwise isn't the smartest photographer then (not open<br> minded).</p> <p>Adam</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wouter Willemse Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <blockquote> <p>To those few who offered nothing but smart alec, sarcastic comments, which lack both knowledge and decorum, you can bugger off!!!...</p> </blockquote> <p>You know, sometimes a question gets the answers it deserves. Considered that what you are asking is the reason for sarcastic comments? Play with fire, get burned.</p> <p>By the way, your pro is talking nonsens. Nikon is quite back in the pro game. Still a lot of white lenses along the lines, but last Tour de France, I saw more red triangles cross my TV screen, and likewise on the Beijing Olympics. Those are pretty big events.<br> But I do not care what pro's use. I like my gear. I know my gear has limits, and if I'm playing close to those limits, I know I might get bad shots. I'd be eternally upgrading to push the limitation, and there would still always be a limit. In the end, the only reason I get crap photos is me, and me alone. I know the limits of my gear and it's up to me to steer clear form those. No other brand, body or lens will solve that equation.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpo3136b Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>I didn't read all of this, but I use Pentax gear.</p> <p>It's like this: once you get past a certain basic point, it's about, How can you use what you've got? If the equipment works, then it works. What's the problem? </p> <p>Go for utility. There are so many things that can go haywire before and after you trip the shutter that it doesn't matter as much what brand name is on the shutter. As long as the individual units are in working order, and you know how to use what you've got to an instinctive level, then most of the rest becomes, at most, fractionally influential. </p> <p>We can't completely escape the influence of equipment in photography; but, the equipment, by itself, doesn't bring us fame and fortune. You don't get any royalties or reputation from owning the stuff. </p> <p>I was watching this instructional painting video one time, by a guy named Dan Gerhartz. He's a pretty good painter. In there, in his video, he remarked that sometimes it was like people asked him, "What color are your paintbrush handles?"</p> <p>Hey, for me, that puts it in perspective. What color are your paintbrush handles? I've seen evidence of one guy, a watercolor painter by the name of Turner, whose unused paints were in a museum. Everyone else? Their completed works are in a museum. </p> <p>Will someone hang up your unused camera and show the rest of the world what brand it was? </p> <p>How about, get a working one that's okay for you instead. You'll make more pictures with confidence with that one. More confidence means better performance. Equipment brand probably matters less than 5%. It'll be more about what do you have, does that work smoothly for you, and how's your day going when you made that photo to completion?</p> <p>Proceed with confidence. Your brand of camera doesn't matter any more than the brand name of the pots and pans that made your last good tasting meal.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p><strong>Moderator note:</strong><br> Folks, this is the Beginner Forum. Those who offered replies that were impatient - including stock non-answers like "Google is your friend" - and sarcasm were, in fact, wrong. Wrong for this forum.</p> <p>If you lack the patience to mentor beginners, please feel free to ignore questions on the Beginner Forum. And if you're using the Unified Forum view and happened to see a "versus" thread and decided to dive in without looking, well... next time, please look and pay attention to which forum you're leaping into.</p> <p>There are plenty of forums where folks play a little rougher. This isn't one of them.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnw63 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 <p>Sally,</p> <p>You must understand that asking, a you put it, "the age old question" is a hotly debated topic. Then, to add the photo guys comments about " MOST pros use Canon" only stokes the fire.</p> <p>The other thing to remember is that the questions about "better gear makes better pictures" is ANOTHER often bumped into topic which has been talked about for years , here at PN and probably DECADES in the real world. As far as I can tell, with my readings over the years is the better gear adds features that enable the photographer to work with their camera more quickly. That's really about it. Three examples , of simple equipment making great shots , that I know of, right off the top of my head, are ...</p> <p>1) Afgan Girl. Do a Google search and you'll find the National Geographic cover taken , reportedly with a Nikon 75-150mm series E lens. The E series was a low end consumer line that Nikon made in the 80s. Not even close to a "pro" lens, yet there is no doubt it's a really good shot.</p> <p>2) I found a web site, some years ago, of a photo guy who took many many pictures in the mountains with a simple Pentax K1000 and MF 50mm lens. The basic student combo if ever there was one !</p> <p>3) There is a guy out there, right now, with a web site, taking pretty darn good shots with an iPhone ! Is the iPhone any good at low light or fast action stuff ? Nope. But it does show that in capable hands, you don't need expensive stuff to make good shots.</p> <p>The point most of use are making is that you realy need to resist the urge to spend a boat load on "pro" marketed gear until you have enough shots under your belt to know EXACTLY why this lens or that camera will help you. Otherwise, you'll spend a lot of money and not see any better results. I think we have seen many MANY frustrated posts by people who have done that. I don't want you to end up as another one of those. Most of the posters, in this thread are of the same mind. Some, just have put things a little smoother.</p> <p>Here is the blunt and of my post. Don't take it badly. I keep it in the back of my head when I am window shoping. When you can really put pro caliber gear to use, you wont have to ask what you should get. You'll know already. </p> <p>Hopefully, I won't get the bugger off reply for this. :)</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now