How is this possible? Please comment.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #16254471
Um, Manual... auto metering? I'm confused.

If you did shoot manual then ignore my first reply (we posted together, I did not see your post directly above mine)

If shutter speed and aperture were constant (set manually) then maybe you have an auto ISO mode set, like highlight tone priority?

Perhaps I misunderstood the question - I shoot in manual mode only,always have ISO set to 100,and the metering,or white balance,set to auto. Did I get that right?

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16254477
For something that drastic, it would have to be a change in lighting. I can barely make out any shadows in the building in the one, but they are very distinct in the other. That is the only reason I would think 2 shots that were exposed identically would have that difference. If you were in manual, whatever metering mode you had has no bearing on the results.

Thats my concern - these images are not just a little off from each other,this is super drastic. And the only thing I changed was the focal point,but only by the smallest margin because I purposely tryed to get it in the same spot.

The flash went off in the second shot, but not in the first.

frugivore wrote in post #16254493
The flash went off in the second shot, but not in the first.

Known as the sun!

The first shot is with the church exposed well, the 2nd is with the building dark. All settings are identical, no HTP is turned on, and in manual mode. There are only 2 logical answers, the natural lighting shifted or there is an issue with the camera.

Side note, it looks like they are going to lose some trees, I assume they are ash. That is exactly what happens to ash when the ash bore gets to them. The canopy at the ends go, then the whole tree (at least above ground) dies. Insidious and extremely harmful insects...

frugivore wrote in post #16254493
The flash went off in the second shot, but not in the first.

You funny guy......

And yes,it was a HUGE flash!

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16254500
Known as the sun!

The first shot is with the church exposed well, the 2nd is with the building dark. All settings are identical, no HTP is turned on, and in manual mode. There are only 2 logical answers, the natural lighting shifted or there is an issue with the camera.

I HATE to think like that,but I agree with what your suggesting. Really bugs me that this could happen,and so randomly - though this is the first time it has happened.

ItsJustEd wrote in post #16254447
Not sure if you've noticed but I added information to the images.

Just a quick note: when you get Flickr or any other embed code, just paste it to post, please do not add IMG tags around it, they are not needed.

There is a 3rd option, but I know you didn't do it. However, it would be something I would try as a joke...

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16254513
There is a 3rd option, but I know you didn't do it. However, it would be something I would try as a joke...

Please tell.

Pekka wrote in post #16254512
Just a quick note: when you get Flickr or any other embed code, just paste it to post, please do not add IMG tags around it, they are not needed.

Pekka,you just threw me for a loop. Only information added was actual details about the image,nothing else. Copy,paste,add details and nothing else.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16254513
There is a 3rd option, but I know you didn't do it. However, it would be something I would try as a joke...

Do tell...

The sky seem to have similar exposure in both shots - it's just the church that is way different.

That would indicate the sun - changes to camera settings (automatic or manual) should have made a huge difference to the clouds too.

It really doesn't take many seconds for the sun to drastically change the conditions on a partly cloudy day.

ItsJustEd wrote in post #16254526
Do tell...

Exif hijacking - (paste an image over another image with the same exif)...

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16254569
Exif hijacking - (paste an image over another image with the same exif)...

That would be mean,lol! But your right,I didnt do that.

pwm2 wrote in post #16254543
The sky seem to have similar exposure in both shots - it's just the church that is way different.

That would indicate the sun - changes to camera settings (automatic or manual) should have made a huge difference to the clouds too.

It really doesn't take many seconds for the sun to drastically change the conditions on a partly cloudy day.

Appreciate the input. I underatsnd what your saying,just not sure that I totally agree in this case.