>>3553412Kek, this is the actual 100% crop (which I still don't think is very sharp, reinforcing my opinion on that lens) All you had to do was post it and hope I bashed it. Instead, you showed the original resized one and took a crop from it, blowing it up to 150% and further ruining the quality. I busted you ages ago right here
>>3553386 and you tried to make up a lie to get out of it. The best part is you were too stupid to realize that either way, you were still stuck. I said it right in the post: if you resized the crop to hide the quality, it didn't work, and if you cropped the original, that didn't work either. It's not a sharp photo... and you made it worse.
I'll watch as you try to bury all of this under an avalanche of posting now, kek. You fucked up badly, retard.
