amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

No.

The 18-135mm is a "crop only" lens... therefore your camera must be an APS-C/crop sensor model. On that camera a 24mm lens would only be slightly wide angle (24mm would "act wider" and make more sense as a landscape lens on a "full frame" camera).

Instead, I'd suggest you look at an ultrawide lens. For cameras such as yours, those are almost all zooms. Canon's EF-S 10-18mm IS STM is a bargain at under $300. It's the smallest, lightest UWA from anyone... and one of only two that have image stabilization. In spite of being a bit plasticky, it's got excellent image quality. A very good alternative, Canon EF-S 10-22mm is an older model that's a bit better built, has larger aperture and has slightly higher performance autofocus (neither of which are really critical for landscape work), also has excellent IQ, and costs about 2X as much. There are also Tokina 12-28mm, 11-20mm f2.8, Sigma 8-16mm, 10-20mm and Tamron 12-24mm.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I do a lot of landscapes and my over riding favorite is the Nikon 16-35 f4. I also shoot the Sony Zeiss 16-35 f2.8 but it is a beast heavy compared to the Nikon. My second favorite is the Nikon 14-24 mm. I believe you short change your self with a prime for landscapes, I first find the angle and then work on what to include, for me the zoom works out better for me.

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

Is there a right

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

Is there a RIGHT focal lenght? Take GNP waterfalls, Black Widow is a mile from Going to the Sun road, Haystake is witin 20 ft from the Road. On the East of Logan pass the falls can't be seen untill you get to Lunch creek which is 3/4 a mile from the falls. I could give many more examples, I've used 18mm to 600mm.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I am guessing that you are using a crop (1.6x) sensor. If you were to move up to a full frame sensor you might find that a 35 or 40 mm lens would be comparable to 24 mm on a crop sensor.

You could always review your own images and see what focal length you use most often for landscapes and start with the prime lens that is close to that.

Others may disagree but in my opinion the most useful focal length for landscapes on full frame is 35 mm (24 mm for APS-C) followed by 50 mm (35 mm APS-C) then 85 mm (50 mm APS-C). One more lens at either end of the range pretty well rounds things out - 16 mm if you are using a crop sensor or 135 for full frame - but you will probably not use either of these very often.

There should be plenty of affordable full frame lenses and you can find them used if you are on a budget. I would not recommend lenses designed for crop sensors because when you move to full frame they become relatively useless.

But if you want to stay with a crop sensor and don't plan to move up to full frame, you might as well just look for a wider angle zoom with 24 mm near the long end of the range.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

NO

So, you are on a crop frame body ! ?

The 18-135 is an OK lens - especially at the f-stops you are likely to be using for landscapes.

A nice upgrade for you would be the Sigma 18-35mm, the Canon 15-85 or the Tokina 12-28mm f4 . Your biggest draw back is the Canon crop sensor.....

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

EXCELLENT !!!!

Uuglypher Loc: South Dakota (East River)

Zoom or primes for landscapes?

Depends on the relative importance of maximal image data quality for large print production versus the convenience of the wide-to-telephoto zoom lens.

If the purpose of the image is documentation of sites visited on the family trip and to be viewed in on-line images sent to the relatives and as small prints for the album... you'll appreciate the convenience and reduced kit weight associated with reliance upon the wide-to-telephoto zoom lens.

If, however, maximal detail definition is desired throughout hyperfocality for ultimate quality large print production, bite the bullet and make a choice from among the prime focal length lenses that will provide the desired composition in the camera as viewed in the display at exposure (and for maximal acuteness use an aperture near the middle of the chosen lens' aperture range).

As in all aspects of photography, all choices are based on trade-offs.

Dave

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

If you have the need for a 24mm f2.8 lens the answer is YES.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

No and no. First off, you need to let us know which body you use. APS-C sensors and FF sensors are different and the recommendation will require this information. Typically a crop camera body will use something in the range of 10-22mm and a full frame will use 16-35mm.

DebAnn Loc: Toronto

I use the Canon 18-135 for almost everything. For me it is exactly what I need for portraits and landscapes of various types - and anything else I choose to shoot. I can honestly say that I don't need anything else. However, that doesn't mean that I don't want something else. My interest in landscape photography is quite recent and I have just ordered a 10-20mm lens because it will give me more versatility.

lowkick Loc: Connecticut

The Canon 18-135mm is an EF-s lens, so you are apparently using a crop sensor camera. That makes the lens the equivalent of an 29-216mm lens in effect. You are at the longer focal length of wide angle lenses at 29mm. If you get a 24mm it will give you the effect of a 38.4mm lens - beyond wide angle range. I would suggest something like the Sigma 10-20mm, which will give you the equivalent of a 16-32mm zoom. That will give you a good wide angle range to work with.

ecurb1105

No.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Why do you need a wide angle to work with? Learning another technique - panoramic shooting and stitching - will cost the OP nothing, and will generally result in better results. See the images I posted above - all taken with normal to 150mm focal lengths (on a full frame). Wide lenses are not the first choice for sweeping expansive shots.

lowkick Loc: Connecticut

You don't necessarily need a wide angle, and I didn't claim that it was necessary. Read the original post I was responding to.