wideangle question - in regards to taking landscape pics with sky

Hey Guys,

I recently have purchased a Sigma 10-20mm wideangle lens and have taken afew shots of landscapes with nice blue sky with a polarizing filter and it seems all the time i take pics with it the sky looks flat.. in the view finder the sky looks like its got depth and goes for miles but when i see the pic on screen all the depth has gone and its all flat looking..

is this because i am using a wideangle lens? or is it the polarizing filter??
im abit confused because i have seen people take pics with wideangle lenses and the sky looks normal with depth.. so im not sure what i am doing wrong...
ill post an example

below is a pic i have taken from deviantart.. i really like this pic because the sky looks rich and in depth.. you can see it goes back for miles

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

The sky looks flat because your camera is trying to find the best exposure for the shot. It has to blow out the the clouds a bit in order to get a good exposure on the foreground.

I would try using a graduated neutral density filter.

I think that, in part, its down to composition. In that first image the river is leading the eye into the scene. In the second, for me, the pond acts as a block to the eye and in the third, I think there is too much sky. Have you tried cropping some of the sky to see how it looks?

weemannie wrote:
I think that, in part, its down to composition. In that first image the river is leading the eye into the scene. In the second, for me, the pond acts as a block to the eye and in the third, I think there is too much sky. Have you tried cropping some of the sky to see how it looks?

i could crop it but why would that make any difference?

you can see straight away the clouds are not in depth

this is the kind of effect i want to get:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

can anyone please help?

Id say it comes down to PP? Just my $0.02

I second the Grad ND

CP's are best used and yield their best results when the sun is closer to the horizon. If you search there is a good thread on the used of CPs.

Alot depends on time of day, direction of the sun, and atmospheric conditions. No two sky shots are ever going to be the same due to the interaction of all these factors.I believe your sample photo was taken at a high altitude which makes the skies a deeper blue. And a polarizer can give an equal effect if the skies are clear of haze and the sun is in the right position relative to the camera's view. I think this one was done with a graduated ND because you can usually see that the mountain on the right is darker where it sticks up into part of the image affected by the GND filter.

I must have been out the day we talked about CP's..LOL
What is that?

i vote for a gradual neutral density filter aswell. best way to get good esposure of sky and ground.

on another note, looks like the guy you took the picture from needs to get some thin filters, or not stack them.

To my mind, part of the problem is the distance to the horizon. In the images you have captured, the distance to the horizon is only half a mile or so. In the one you are seeking to emulate, there is a second set of peaks some 15 miles away. These lend a depth to the image that is then applied by inference to the sky.

You have to remember that a polariser is not a 'magic bullet', and that in some angles (relative between you, the sun, and the field of view) will not allow the polariser to do anything for you.

thanks guys.. i will look into getting a grad ND
is there a better brand of these on the market??

B+W makes aurguably some of the best filters out there.

But at a price... alot!