login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > Would you go from the 24-70mm f/2.8 to 1.8 Primes Search   Reply
12last
Photographer
Ky Goulden Photography
Posts: 64
Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa


Hiya yall,
Long story short, I have a 5D MK II with a 24-70mm f/2.8.

Ive had the lens for around a year and find the results... kind of lacking.
Ive tried other 24-70mm f/2.8's and its not my lens in particular, its just... the lens itself.

The results, of course, are dependant on how I use them but I find the overall soul of it kidna lacking. I love my 50mm f/1.8 and have played a bit with a 100mm Macro and Im really tempted to sell my 24-70 for a few primes. 

I found it never quite was enough of anything and just a bit of everything. Nice jack of trades, master of none.

I know everyone has their preferences but... Hmmm.

But what I am thinking of getting is :
20mm f/2.8 ( or the 28mm f/1.8 )
35mm f/2
100mm f/2.8 MACRO ( or the 85mm f/1.8 )

What are your thoughts on this ?
I shoot Fashion+Beauty, Model, Commercial and Weddings.
Apr 19 13 10:02 am  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,403
San Francisco, California, US


I like the 24-70mm.  I also like primes.   I have them both.  You couldn't get me to choose between them.
Apr 19 13 10:03 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Drew Smith Photography
Posts: 5,209
Nottingham, England, United Kingdom


I have both.

Only recently bought the 85mm 1.8 and am still experimenting with it.

I think I get what you are saying about the 'feel' the lens gives to an image. My 50mm 1.8 always seems to produce lovely 'creamy' shots. But that's probably just my imagination. I don't really think one is a substitute for the other.
Apr 19 13 10:07 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ky Goulden Photography
Posts: 64
Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa


For me to do that... I would have a lot more cash than i do right now.
Apr 19 13 10:08 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
R_Marquez
Posts: 4,607
San Francisco, California, US


I'm a fan of the 20mm f/2.8 and I have one. Mine is pretty sharp and I like the contrast from it.

With that said, I shoot weddings and other events also and the 24-70mm is my go-to lens. I haven't used the 20mm in a while.

The 24-70mm is not the best as far as image quality is concerned, but it's reliable. Only way I would get rid of it would be to get a 24mm f/1.4 or the 35mm f/1.4. I use two bodies but I still like a zoom, just in case.
Apr 19 13 10:09 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Gulag
Posts: 1,219
Duluth, Georgia, US


The short answer is Yes and No.
Apr 19 13 10:10 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MILLAR STUDIO
Posts: 13
Kilwinning, Scotland, United Kingdom


Why not hire the 35mm and 100mm primes, try them for a while and see how you get on? 

Got to be cheaper than buying a lens and then thinking...Hmmmmm.
Apr 19 13 10:10 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Ky Goulden Photography wrote:
Hiya yall,
Long story short, I have a 5D MK II with a 24-70mm f/2.8.

Ive had the lens for around a year and find the results... kind of lacking.
Ive tried other 24-70mm f/2.8's and its not my lens in particular, its just... the lens itself.

The results, of course, are dependant on how I use them but I find the overall soul of it kidna lacking. I love my 50mm f/1.8 and have played a bit with a 100mm Macro and Im really tempted to sell my 24-70 for a few primes. 

I found it never quite was enough of anything and just a bit of everything. Nice jack of trades, master of none.

I know everyone has their preferences but... Hmmm.

But what I am thinking of getting is :
20mm f/2.8 ( or the 28mm f/1.8 )
35mm f/2
100mm f/2.8 MACRO ( or the 85mm f/1.8 )

What are your thoughts on this ?
I shoot Fashion+Beauty, Model, Commercial and Weddings.

The decision has nothing to do with image quality and is only relevant in terms of how you shoot.

Apr 19 13 10:17 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jay Lee Studios
Posts: 1,238
San Diego, California, US


Each lens has a use, each lens is a tool. If you are not getting the results you need from that tool it does not mean it is the wrong tool it may be you are just using it wrong. 24-70 is a work horse for both Canon and Nikon. I have it but I don't use it for every shot but if you shoot weddings you NEED it.
Apr 19 13 10:28 am  Link  Quote 
Clothing Designer
GRMACK
Posts: 1,612
Bakersfield, California, US


Quick question:  Have you fine-tuned the AF on that body?

One I had had serious issues with the AF system and the outer 9 AF points.  Never really thought that much about it until the Nikon guys started complaining about the D800 AF left-right issue.  Mine has a serious left-right and top-bottom issue with the 9 points.  Was worse than the Nikon D7000 DX body too once I delved into it a bit more.  Even the D800E I have was better than the above two in the FoCal comparison.

Might want to check into getting FoCal Pro software and running your 24-70 though it and check your near and far AF tuning numbers.  Also run the AF multi-point sensor check and see if one or another is really bad.  Canon had a lot of issues on that body which no prime lens may address if it is out of alignment.

Good luck.
Apr 19 13 10:29 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Alien LiFe
Posts: 812
San Francisco, California, US


I did just that few months ago ... sold my 24-70 & 14-24 ... & keep 85mm 1.4 & 50mm 1.8
I also planning to let go my 17-35mm, 35mm 1.5 & maybe eventually 70-200mm 2.8 (still not sure about the later) mainly because I don't use them as much.

Now, since I shoot mostly outdoor portraituire/nudes, 85mm pretty much stay on my camera at all time ... wink
Apr 19 13 10:32 am  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 34,403
San Francisco, California, US


Ky Goulden Photography wrote:
Hiya yall,
Long story short, I have a 5D MK II with a 24-70mm f/2.8.

Ive had the lens for around a year and find the results... kind of lacking.
Ive tried other 24-70mm f/2.8's and its not my lens in particular, its just... the lens itself.

The results, of course, are dependant on how I use them but I find the overall soul of it kidna lacking. I love my 50mm f/1.8 and have played a bit with a 100mm Macro and Im really tempted to sell my 24-70 for a few primes. 

I found it never quite was enough of anything and just a bit of everything. Nice jack of trades, master of none.

I know everyone has their preferences but... Hmmm.

But what I am thinking of getting is :
20mm f/2.8 ( or the 28mm f/1.8 )
35mm f/2
100mm f/2.8 MACRO ( or the 85mm f/1.8 )

What are your thoughts on this ?
I shoot Fashion+Beauty, Model, Commercial and Weddings.
MC Photo wrote:
The decision has nothing to do with image quality and is only relevant in terms of how you shoot.

I agree with you, but only partially.  I think it is all about the way you shoot.  For me, that is why I have both.

That having been said, DXOmark recently tested a variety of lenses for the D800 and it was remarkable how much better the primes performed.   The anecdotal belief by most was that the zooms had caught up.  So, while they did turn in impressive test results, there was no doubt that the primes performed better.

From a practical standpoint, I doubt there is much of a difference that most of us would see.  So, I agree with you, it is really more about your shooting needs than the quality of the lenses though.  It would be wrong though to say that the primes weren't better.  The only question is if it is really enough to make a difference if a zoom is the right lens for the job.

Apr 19 13 10:39 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Backstreet Photography
Posts: 136
Salem, Oregon, US


I don't think i could use one OR the other.  I keep my 85 and 24-70 on my D3, and use a variety of primes/tele's on the other DX bodies.  Lenses are like dessert ~ i gotta have it all, not JUST one type since i don't shoot ONE type of images.  I don't personally know anyone that shoots JUST primes, or JUST tele's ~ m'
Apr 19 13 10:46 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Schlake
Posts: 2,159
Socorro, New Mexico, US


I only use the 24-70 when changing lenses would be impossible. Specifically cage fights. Otherwise I use the 20/50/100mm primes. I usually suggest the primes over the zoom as well.
Apr 19 13 10:54 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Phil Drinkwater
Posts: 4,713
Manchester, England, United Kingdom


The new 24-70 II is exceptional. Way better than than the first version.

All that said, I love my primes too. I have 35L, 50L, 100L and 135L. Of them all the 100 is the best bang for buck IMO..
Apr 19 13 02:19 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ky Goulden Photography
Posts: 64
Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa


Whelp. If speed is the issue, then I would understand why people vote for the lens. Its very versatile. But none of the wedding photographers I know use zooms at all. We're not talking el-cheapo togs but big ones like Jasmine Star and the rest.

Priming is possible with weddings and speed events, but my major question is this :
Will the primes match that L lens in terms of quality ? I love the 1.8 and intense depth of field look as well as the idea of getting a nice 100mm macro lens for details and beauty close ups.

If those primes are going to give me more in terms of range and quality, then I dont mind giving up speed and convenience.

Like I said before, I shoot fashion, commercial and weddings. So its a mixed bag in terms of need. As for buying primes ALONG with my 24-70mm f/2.8, Im not quite getting enough work to do that. I jumped the job boat a year too soon, and am living comfortably but not quite enough yet to pay for a lot of gear.

And thank you everyone for your feedback, It helps me greatly and I take every view very seriously.
Apr 19 13 02:39 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jerry Nemeth
Posts: 26,728
Dearborn, Michigan, US


GPS Studio Services wrote:
I like the 24-70mm.  I also like primes.   I have them both.  You couldn't get me to choose between them.

+1

Apr 19 13 02:46 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Will Snizek Photography
Posts: 1,387
Beckley, West Virginia, US


I like prime lenses personally, but a lot of that has to do with the fact you can get a fast prime lens pretty cheap.  If I had unlimited funds, I'd probably buy every lens ever made.  Lol
Apr 19 13 02:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ky Goulden Photography
Posts: 64
Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa


@R Marquez :
You're right. Its a great lens. It just... doesn't look like anything. If you know what I mean. I always feel like, its an average lens. Im always wondering what it would look like with a wider aperture or wider mm ( in South African venues, 9 times out of 10, you are in an incredibly cramped space ).

@Millar Studio
I rented those lenses before, but it was a while ago. That being said, I loved using them, but I had a 24-105mm f/4 too.  Luckily it was an outdoors wedding so light and space wasnt an issue.

At the last wedding, there was absolutely minimal space with minimal light both when the bride was prepping and during the reception. I used some off camera flash to just fill the room a little but the hall where the dances was was HUGE and I only had a small softbox with me. I would've needed a frikken floodlight.

That 24-70mm f/2.8 just fell short of all the requirements for that wedding. It handled the photoshoot and the rest well, but where I really needed some extra OOMPH, it fell flat. tongue

@MC Photo :

Regarding the style of my work,
Hmm. How does one equate ones style with lenses... its hard to tell. But, I love softness and the more cinematic feel. If I could kit myself out with 1.4 / 1.2 's I would in a heartbeat. But... I cannot afford that and I would at least like to try to get the cheaper primes so I can start getting my flow with them.
Apr 19 13 03:00 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Fred Greissing
Posts: 6,153
Los Angeles, California, US


Hi Ky

The 24-70 is a "master of one trade". Zooming around the wide to short (very short) tele.

It's a huge benefit and IMO you should keep it.

As far as a good inexpensive lens to add the 100mm f2 is a really good lens.
Internal very fast focusing. Very clean and sharp. Also takes sharpening very well.

I'd say it has all the IQ of an L lens.

IF you do need to sell your 24-70mm the Canon 28-135mm is actually good option if you shoot a bit stopped down.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revi … &APIComp=3

Canon 100mm F2 wide open.
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6021/5963259140_a5d90afb86_b.jpg

Cropped from the same file:
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6009/5961735537_d78f0487f3_b.jpg

100mm F2 in the studio: at F8. (with the 5D II)
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6121/5961735589_e214d43739_b.jpg

Crop from same file:
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6121/5961735575_e94944b9c9_b.jpg

It's a great lens.
Apr 19 13 03:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
NC Art Photos
Posts: 563
Raleigh, North Carolina, US


Ky Goulden Photography wrote:
Hiya yall,
Long story short, I have a 5D MK II with a 24-70mm f/2.8.

Ive had the lens for around a year and find the results... kind of lacking.
Ive tried other 24-70mm f/2.8's and its not my lens in particular, its just... the lens itself.

The results, of course, are dependant on how I use them but I find the overall soul of it kidna lacking. I love my 50mm f/1.8 and have played a bit with a 100mm Macro and Im really tempted to sell my 24-70 for a few primes. 

I found it never quite was enough of anything and just a bit of everything. Nice jack of trades, master of none.

I know everyone has their preferences but... Hmmm.

But what I am thinking of getting is :
20mm f/2.8 ( or the 28mm f/1.8 )
35mm f/2
100mm f/2.8 MACRO ( or the 85mm f/1.8 )

What are your thoughts on this ?
I shoot Fashion+Beauty, Model, Commercial and Weddings.

I shot with a Nikon F2 for decades with f2.8 prime lenses.  I bought the 5D MkII with the 24-105 and I can't say I am happy with the lens.  It's OK, but no where near as sharp as my old primes at the focal lengths I used - 24, 35, 50, 55 micro, and 105. 

I'd probably buy a 70-200 f2.8 zoom if I ever needed it, but I will more likely buy a bunch of the primes for their sharpness.

Apr 19 13 03:23 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AJScalzitti
Posts: 12,186
Atlanta, Georgia, US


I do love prime lens, but I learned back in the film day on Pentax; a whole lot of primes.

Now I may consider that new Sigma f/1.8 zoom for my 7D (its crop only) if it turns out as good as their recent lens.
Apr 19 13 03:30 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Christopher Hartman
Posts: 53,733
Buena Park, California, US


Ky Goulden Photography wrote:
Hiya yall,
Long story short, I have a 5D MK II with a 24-70mm f/2.8.

Ive had the lens for around a year and find the results... kind of lacking.
Ive tried other 24-70mm f/2.8's and its not my lens in particular, its just... the lens itself.

The results, of course, are dependant on how I use them but I find the overall soul of it kidna lacking. I love my 50mm f/1.8 and have played a bit with a 100mm Macro and Im really tempted to sell my 24-70 for a few primes. 

I found it never quite was enough of anything and just a bit of everything. Nice jack of trades, master of none.

I know everyone has their preferences but... Hmmm.

But what I am thinking of getting is :
20mm f/2.8 ( or the 28mm f/1.8 )
35mm f/2
100mm f/2.8 MACRO ( or the 85mm f/1.8 )

What are your thoughts on this ?
I shoot Fashion+Beauty, Model, Commercial and Weddings.

A friend of mine did.  She no longer uses her 24-70 f/2.8.  She's got a 35, 85, and a 105 (though that is a 2.8 I think).

Apr 19 13 03:33 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Ky Goulden Photography wrote:
@MC Photo :

Regarding the style of my work,
Hmm. How does one equate ones style with lenses... its hard to tell. But, I love softness and the more cinematic feel. If I could kit myself out with 1.4 / 1.2 's I would in a heartbeat. But... I cannot afford that and I would at least like to try to get the cheaper primes so I can start getting my flow with them.

I don't mean the visual style of your work. I mean the way you shoot physically.

I'm a prime shooter except for the fact that the focal lengths I most prefer exist only on a 1.3 crop, which is fine when I don't mind the giant 1D4 body.

On the FF 5D3, there's no 31.5mm lens or a 65mm lens, so I've ended up using the new 24-70 which I love.

I often set it to one of the marked focal lengths and treat it like a prime, but it's inevitable that I'll bracket shots in terms of focal lengths. Then when making selections later it's a bit of a mess because there's no back to back consistency.


One of the reasons I prefer primes is I like their smaller size and weight. I like shooting with one hand and I like not having to look through the viewfinder. I do that enough that at 35 and wider I can frame accurately without looking. It's not uncommon for their to be a lot of movement when I shoot, meaning the shoot is moving through locations while shooting. The lighter I can travel the better.

There was a point where I cut back to shooting with two primes, no bag, no strap other than a hand strap and I was amazed at how big a difference I felt. This was during a concert where I had no restrictions on where I could shoot from, so I was shooting from all over the venue and stage. I didn't have to deal with bag shifting while I shot or finding a safe place to put it down while shooting. Lots of people don't shoot that way, so it's not an issue.

If you don't have anything specific about the way you shoot that determines what lenses you need to use, and you don't need the 1.4 for low light, then I'd go for the new 24-70 and keep it simple.

Your "OOMPH" issues are probably your post production or the way you're lighting things.

Apr 19 13 04:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Chris David Photography
Posts: 410
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia


I would find shooting weddings/events very difficult without zooms as its very dynamic and things change constantly. The amount of time, light and space varies so you need to be able to work very fast with what ever situation your in. The 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8IS has been my workhorse for the past 8 years. Recently 25-105 f4 and then few weeks ago Sigma EFS 17-55 2.8 IS.  I only keep the macro primes in the bag but 90% of shoots are with zooms.
When it comes to more fashion/studio/product shots primes work well but also depends if you need the shallow DOP/Bokeh and sharpness. The majority of clients I'm shooting for these days need the shots for web and prints no larger then A4/A3 and so the extra sharpness of primes will not be noticed.
Apr 19 13 06:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Instinct Images
Posts: 22,464
San Diego, California, US


I like the convenience of zooms but I wasn't impressed with my 24-70 either. You might want to try out the version II and see if you're more impressed with it than the original one you have. The reviews are excellent and people are raving about it. I've shot with a couple of wide angle L lenses and was very impressed with the quality. But I still like the convenience of a zoom. I hate swapping lenses in a hurry to try to get a shot. So it really depends on how/what you're shooting. It's a lot easier in a studio to use primes for example than a wedding.
Apr 19 13 07:11 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Digiography
Posts: 3,333
Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada


AJScalzitti wrote:
I do love prime lens, but I learned back in the film day on Pentax; a whole lot of primes.

Now I may consider that new Sigma f/1.8 zoom for my 7D (its crop only) if it turns out as good as their recent lens.

+1  If the new Sigma is as good as it sounds and isn't outrageously priced.

http://fstoppers.com/sigma-confirms-rum … -real-deal

Apr 19 13 07:15 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
1k-words-photograpy
Posts: 320
Leesburg, Virginia, US


I think there may be a whole in your plan. Simply that the 24-70 Mark II is what a $900 lens? I don't think one of those lenses will be sold and cop you multiple Ls.

That said, I have a 24-70 but I prefer my 24-105 greatly. But I use my 85 and 100 a lot. So keep the 24-70 and pile in a few more lenses.
Apr 19 13 07:18 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Raoul Isidro Images
Posts: 5,929
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia


I have the 24-70 2.8L

I have primes of 20:2.8, 35:2, 50:1.4 and 85:1.8

They are used for specific purposes.

The 24-70 is generally an all around ever ready lens.

You need as much arsenal as you can afford to be able to realize and translate your vision into images.

.
Apr 19 13 08:06 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jon Macapodi
Posts: 285
New York, New York, US


Yeah, I got rid of my zooms.

I have a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 105mm, and 180mm. I don't miss my zooms AT ALL, and I also shoot weddings.
Apr 19 13 09:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Yingwah Productions
Posts: 1,341
New York, New York, US


1k-words-photograpy wrote:
I think there may be a whole in your plan. Simply that the 24-70 Mark II is what a $900 lens? I don't think one of those lenses will be sold and cop you multiple Ls.

Do you buy your gear out of a guy's trunk? price of 24-70mm II is $2,299.00

Apr 19 13 10:03 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Phantasmal Images
Posts: 564
Boston, Massachusetts, US


Yingwah Productions wrote:

Do you buy your gear out of a guy's trunk? price of 24-70mm II is $2,299.00

That's the MSRP, Amazon list them as $1950 new, and $1050 used. You can probably find them even cheaper on ebay and craigslist. So $900 for a used lens is not that unlikely.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-70mm-2-8 … n+24+70+ii

Apr 19 13 10:22 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Phil Drinkwater
Posts: 4,713
Manchester, England, United Kingdom


Ky Goulden Photography wrote:
Whelp. If speed is the issue, then I would understand why people vote for the lens. Its very versatile. But none of the wedding photographers I know use zooms at all. We're not talking el-cheapo togs but big ones like Jasmine Star and the rest.

Plenty of the top wedding photographers use zoom - as many as use primes.

Apr 19 13 11:07 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Frozen Instant Imagery
Posts: 3,630
Dublin, Dublin, Ireland


I have already gone from 2.8 zooms to primes, but I didn't go to 1.8 primes. I went to L primes: 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 50/1.2, 85/1.2, 100/2.8, 135/2, 200/2 from the original 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 IS. Never regretted making the change.

I believe the Mark II versions of the 24-70 and 70-200 are significant improvements, so the comparison may be different now.
Apr 19 13 11:44 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Hikari Tech Photography
Posts: 791
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


GPS Studio Services wrote:
I like the 24-70mm.  I also like primes.   I have them both.  You couldn't get me to choose between them.

+1

Ice cream or cake? Really, does one have to choose either over the other?

Apr 20 13 12:14 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jon Macapodi
Posts: 285
New York, New York, US


de BUEN PHOTOGRAPHY wrote:

+1

Ice cream or cake? Really, does one have to choose either over the other?

This is going against my "primes only" philosophy of work, but ice cream cake is a pretty damn good invention.

Apr 20 13 12:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
D M E C K E R T
Posts: 4,786
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


Phantasmal Images wrote:

That's the MSRP, Amazon list them as $1950 new, and $1050 used. You can probably find them even cheaper on ebay and craigslist. So $900 for a used lens is not that unlikely.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-70mm-2-8 … n+24+70+ii

your link goes to version 1. which routinely shows up for less than $1k on CL or gear sale sites.

amazon lists the mkII at $2049 new, and even on fred miranda it's not dipping 60% from there.

just sayin'

Apr 20 13 12:46 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


1k-words-photograpy wrote:
I think there may be a whole in your plan. Simply that the 24-70 Mark II is what a $900 lens? I don't think one of those lenses will be sold and cop you multiple Ls.

That said, I have a 24-70 but I prefer my 24-105 greatly. But I use my 85 and 100 a lot. So keep the 24-70 and pile in a few more lenses.

If it was $900 it would be impossible to keep in stock.

Apr 20 13 02:46 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Phantasmal Images wrote:

That's the MSRP, Amazon list them as $1950 new, and $1050 used. You can probably find them even cheaper on ebay and craigslist. So $900 for a used lens is not that unlikely.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-70mm-2-8 … n+24+70+ii

You've linked to the mkI, not the mkII

Apr 20 13 02:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
I M N Photography
Posts: 2,280
New York, New York, US


Are you going on a trip, and are trying to minimize your travel gear?
Why choose?
Apr 20 13 02:54 pm  Link  Quote 
12last   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers