>>4249295Alex Burke is one of the more successful landscape photographers anyone on /p/ knows besides ansel adams ('cause he posted here), and he mostly used a 24mm equivalent lens. Ansel Adams didn't use crazy lenses either.
What you need to do to go really, really wide... is learn to use gear instead of learning to buy it. You can actually have an arbitrarily wide angle of view horizontally, vertically, or both with landscape and architecture photography if you invest $25 in chinese tripod accessories and do a little measuring ahead of time to find the nodal point (parallax point) of the lens at whatever FL it is fixed/set at. If you will only use your UWAs for stationary subjects this is better, cheaper, and lighter than investing in UWAs that miss shots on non-landscape subjects and also saves you a lens swap.
This is a totally system-agnostic technique. You do not need FF, MFT, or APS-C, or a 24mm or a 50mm lens to do it. You need a steady tripod, a geared/fluid head not a ball head, and a nodal shift rail with marking for repeatability. Possibly a sturdy L bracket, if you want more vertical FOV without shooting an additional row. You can shoot panoramas moving the camera about its lenses nodal point with any focal length with unlimited amounts of columns and rows, to the point where it's only viewable as an interactive 3d image.
The only thing this doesn't cover is image/film plane movements for different DOF orientations and perspective control. You need a tilt/shift lens for this, and the bigger your sensor the more creative control you have with those... and they're also pretty pricey or pretty low quality, pick your poison.
>>4249300>Standing on the edge of a cliff>beautiful landscape>i just wish I could cut out that tree in the foreground. Oh well, my prime is light, so I can walk without issue!>*steps forward*So that's where MFT's market share went
