Kind of "faraway looking" shots, due to short focal lengths. THese two pics would be better if they had stronger,larger foreground elements. Like in the second shot--if you had stepped out,into the water at the shore 1 or 2 waves, you'd have a cool point of view,with ,more water,and less beach. When using a short,wide-angle lens, you need "Something in the foreground" to really look at, and that means getting very close to the foreground object...because with a wide-angle lens, the background looks very far,far away...like, in shot 1, that duck blind or boat house or whatever it is offshore--it looks far,far away,and it is physically very tiny in the frame. If you had shot that shot at 55mm, or with your 105mm macro, the boathouse would have been enlarged. If you had walked over, much closer to the breakwall rip-rap, and shot #1 with the same focal length but 30 feet close to the rip-rap, it would have been significantly better, and that boathouse would have measured, literally, probably 3x larger in the final image--- from just 30 feet closer a camera position!
Skillfully using a wide-angle lens take a lot of practice,study, and learning. Something like the 10-20 is kind of a nightmarish landascape lens at the seashore...it's simply too wide for these types of shots unless there is a lot shorter expanse of land and water than you have here....that "farawy look" kinda sucks the life out of many scenes...it gives us very little visual reward...
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/34/34125-d7028823900ffcf1cfce62bf748dea24.jpg?1734164621)
