I must say that I'm not entirely with you on your analysis Tom.


Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wertman
If it were me I would be careful about pushing the ISO so high. It's nice to see the camera can do it without noise getting out of hand

Agreed on this part, and Alex also look out for the tweener ISO's. ISO 2000 for example looks lower than ISO 3200 and so you might expect lower noise levels, but that isn't true. That only counts for true ISO values: 100-200-400-800-1600-3200-6400. ISO 2000 for example is a picture taken with ISO 3200 and processed 2/3 stop underexposed in camera-processing. It might not technically precisely work like this, but the idea is sound. So you get the idea [] Therefor I personally have set my ISO to only use full stop numbers.


Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wertman
with the exception of the last two shots all others are a bit over exposed

I'm not sure what your idea is of over/underexposure, but the lastoneactually seems underexposed to me. I can't imagine a shot like that one exposed properly with those settings: 1/250 f11 ISO500. With those settings and lighting I would assume this shot is taken early or lately during the day, but we don't see the actual level of light that was available at that point. Mostly because for having those settings, a pretty decent amount of light is needed to expose naturally, which we don't really get to see. I do like the shot, but I don't think it is "naturally" exposed. But I guess this shot was intended this way and proper exposure is very subjective?


Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wertman
Notice the inconsistant color of the church interior from shot to shot

I agree that custom white-balance or post-processing white balance adjustment would be a good idea.


Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wertman
High lights of the stained glass and doorway are blown out and I'll bet the histogram confirms this

I don't think this is an honest challenge since the camera would never be able to capture the actual dynamic range that is available there. You must lose some detail in either the darker parts or the lighter parts of the picture. If I were to shoot my own room or a church or whatever else indoor with a window viewing outside and I would expose for the interior it would seem obvious to me that the windows and everything else of the exterior would be blown out. The camera just can't handle such a wide dynamic range. HDR would cover this part pretty good I think. But with those shutterspeeds and without a tripod I wouldn't take my chances [A]


I guess my idea of proper exposure is different than yours, so just look at my idea as an opinion and not the absolute truth.


If you want to, I'm really interest in a shot of the interior of a church or something with consistent exposure and white balance so I would really like to see an example from you. Perhaps it will change my opinion.


Jan