I like the detail in the image, but there are several places that appear nearly blown out, particularly the rear quarter panel of the car and the back of one of the street signs. I'd suggest trying to take the images later or earlier in the day when the light is a bit softer.
Yes, you are correct CKiely. I am still using auto a lot of the time but these were taken at a fixed aperture so DOF was not a problem. Next step is to use full manual exposure.
Here is another from the 'shady side of the street'. I'm not sure if I've over-corrected for the perspective/verticals - it doesn't sit quite right. It was blowing a mini gale so there is ghosting in the leaves at top and I almost missed the taxi - comments please - I've got lots to learn yet.
Yes, I agree that the "straightness" of the buildings looks a little unnatural. I find that when perspective correcting, if you make it "perfect" along the grid lines it actually looks as if the top of the building is wider. I think the human brain expects a little bit of convergence to look natural, so I leave a little in. I guess we are used to looking up at tall objects such as buildings.
Hard shadows is not a problem You can use bracketing to get details in shadows and stich photos later using one of 'dynamic range extension' technologies. I used photomatrix for this task. I don't know, can autopano be used to stich overlapped images to extend DR, or no.