Lives in United States United States
Works as a College Student
Joined on Jul 6, 2011


Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8

They could have defined "digitally altered" in the beginning before asking me what percentage of photos out there have been manipulated. I said 95%, thinking of things like brightness/exposure changes, but apparently, they were looking for just major alterations.

Link | Posted on Jul 23, 2017 at 18:58 UTC as 15th comment | 2 replies

Me wants!!!

Link | Posted on Mar 20, 2013 at 10:19 UTC as 20th comment
On article HTC One: Is it the ultimate camera phone? (76 comments in total)

I think beyond 720p, there is really no way for our eyes to tell the difference 720p and 1080p on a 4.7 inch screen. At this point, I think it's just a marketing gimmick, although I may be wrong.

Link | Posted on Feb 20, 2013 at 07:02 UTC as 9th comment
On article Just Posted: Canon EOS 5D Mark III review (672 comments in total)

I really wish that DpReview will stop mentioning other camera brands (not just Nikon) when reviewing on a single product.
It gets on my nerve that they are trying to compare Canon to Nikon, which I believe is completely off-topic. I don't care what D800 has (I bet D800 is a wonderful camera—it's just that I don't have any investment in Nikon as of the moment). If the title of the review is "Canon EOS 5D Mark III Review," then that's what I want, not some rivalry between two companies.
Please DP Review, focus on a single product (and it's predecessor if applicable) but not on some other companies' merchandises.

Link | Posted on May 27, 2012 at 06:20 UTC as 41st comment
On article Facebook buys photo sharing service Instagram for $1bn (144 comments in total)

I don't care about the Instagram... Just get rid of that stupid Timeline!!!

Link | Posted on Apr 10, 2012 at 01:27 UTC as 28th comment | 1 reply
On article Roundup: Third-party Lenses for Enthusiasts (169 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tony Beach: I was floored by the price of the latest version of the Sigma 105/2.8 macro; I bought the older version last year for half as much and I'm very happy with it. Even though my A850 has image stabilization built in, I almost never use it, so I cannot imagine that added feature or any of the others justifying a $480 premium.

BTW, the old version is very good, and CA (presumably improved on the newer version) has not been a problem. My one peeve with the Sigma 105 has been its bokeh, which is not great, I'm not sure if that's improved with the newer version, but it's still a hard sell and the weight undermines one of the reasons I have made the switch to primes and bought the Sigma 105/2.8 in the first place.

Overall, I think the cons of this newer lens heavily outweigh its pros. I think DPR should have recommended the 90mm Tamron instead of this overpriced behemoth. Heck, for a little more weight and substantially less cash you could get the Tamron 180/3.5 macro.

I also have the 100mm f2.8L IS Macro. I don't see the point of getting the Sigma version for the same price.
Plus, the L lens is equipped with hybrid IS, which is supposedly superior to any of the Sigma OS.

Link | Posted on Nov 18, 2011 at 00:36 UTC
On photo Edmund photos 09 in the Go Green challenge (1 comment in total)

Wow! Very nice shot!

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2011 at 03:12 UTC as 1st comment
Total: 8, showing: 1 – 8