Anything specific you are looking for where the IPhone or GoPro are falling short?
For landscapes a tripod is useful too btw
The noise in the background sky - especially after editing.
What specs make a lens a good one?
Apart from knowing that I want a wide angle lens for photography, not videos, what do I look for when shopping online to tell which is better quality?
Thanks for all the help!
Unfortunately there's no one place or specific thing that makes a lens a good one, you just have to do some research (ie look at test reviews) and ask online. Price is a good place to start as usually (although not always) the more expensive the lens is the better it performs.
You can use places like DXO to look at lens sharpness scores on specific camera bodies, but you can't quantify how a lens renders, some prefer rendering of one lens over another, some have nicer bokeh than others etc.
It is difficult when starting out, but the more you look into it the more you start to figure out the sites that are useful to you, what qualities you want from a lens etc etc.
So there are a few things to look for :
- First of all is the lens mount the same as the camera you own  Manufacturers have more than one mount to suit different sensor sizes or body styles.
Focal Length
The number(s) quoted in mm are the focal length.
A lens with 18-55mm is a zoom lens with the widest angle of 18mm and the longest telephoto of 55mm.Quite wide to quite zoomed.
A lens with 25mm is a fixed focal length (no zoom)
Things are complicated if you're comparing lenses across different systems with different sized sensors because to compare the field of view for the same focal length you need to apply a "crop factor".
Aperture
The f number indicates the maximum amount of light the lens lets in.
An f4 lens lets in less light than an f2.8 lens so in general the F2.8 will offer more flexibility with lighting, letting you use a faster shutter speed/lower ISO with the same amount of light.
An f2.8 lens is "faster" than an f4 one.
Massive simplification - lower f numbers tend to be better lenses even when they're not using their widest aperture (lowest f number).
Massive simplification - very wide or very long telephoto lenses tend to be heavier and harder to manufacture so arguably "better".But they're only "better" if you need to use that ultawide or extreme telephoto field of view.
Your iPhone and GoPro will both have pretty wide angle lenses.
For landscapes, some photographers favour wide or ultra wide angle lenses.As rule you don't need a fast lens, you want to use a smaller aperture (higher f number) so that more of the landscape is in focus.You can take some pretty decent landscapes with quite modest kit, it's about composition, light and understanding.
As a beginner I would strongly suggest you start with a "kit lens" that manufacturers bundle with their camera bodies to make them work out of the box.Once you've got some experience under your belt you can look at what focal lengths you've used most and if you're struggled with light and then start to make some choices about new lenses.
It's tempting to think that buying a great camera and a great lens will make you a great photographer, but practice and learning from your mistakes are probably more important at the beginning.
Decide on a camera first, whats you Max price for a camera including Wide angle lens sold as a Kit.
Or alternatively buying a camera only, then fitting another manufactures lens could be a better buy for the same money.
You would need to read reviews on the Kit lens, and price's bought as a separate unit.
What you can get the same camera for without the kit Lens.
Shopping around can save a lot of money.
Until you give a specific price or a ball park figure, can any one guide you and then you will get to know what to look for your self and read reviews.
FWIW I think OP needs to tell us what this new camera will be doing that the GoPro and Phone can't.
Just in passing, Most lenses will have an optimum aperture which gives good definition and allows a decent shutter-speed. Until recently this would be a couple of stops down. I didn't understand the earlier comment ( that no-one picked-up) that for Landscapes you'd be stopping down to get more depth of field ( or was that "max...).
As far as I know, when taking a landscape the object is at infinity so there is no requirement for much DoF. - Better to stop-down a couple of stops and use a higher shutter-speed.If you stop-down too much (!) then the shutter-speed will be correspondingly slower, resulting in needing a tripod ( or at least a wall/tree for support ). However, using the lens with a small iris ( e.g at f/16 ), does not improve definition, due to "fringing" at the iris-blades which is more significant,than at larger apertures... It will improve DoF and if the subject demands this, it may be worthwhile.
OP really needs to tell us what he's going to be photographing and what Kit he has already, -or- is prepared to carry.
For a beginner a simple camera may be better for teaching "Basics" provided it has Manual control option. That shows errors and should lead to a better understanding of the Photo-process. However, if "Budget" permits then a "Bridge " camera is good value as it covers most situations. It's only when you need "special situations" (( and know how )) that an expensive DSLR/Mirrorless (( =with interchangeable Lenses)) is a good investment.
For most folks, the added weight of a DSLR is unnecessary.
Interchangeable lens cameras tend to have rather poor "Kit-Zoom" lenses, (( Like 3:1 )), as they expect you'll be buying some of their very expensive lenses.Bridge cameras usually boast 30x or more. Although they will be bulkier than a basic mirrorless.
Er, IMHO.
I take it you don't take landscape photos? Apart from the composition and light, landscape is all about obtaining as much DOF as possible, and quite often the subject is certainly not at infinity either. I can imagine if I set a number of my shots at infinity and only stopped down a couple of stops to increase shutter speed then a large part of the foreground would be out of focus.
There are two 'general' trains of thought (and I must emphasise 'general') when it comes to focussing for landscape. The 'old school' method was to focus on a subject in the distance and set aperture to f22, which should give a very large DOF. However, the downside to this method is that at the smaller apertures you introduce diffraction (not fringing as you mention as this is what you tend to get with fast lenses at wide open apertures and is actually prevented by stopping down), and is even more apparent as you use smaller sensors such as APS-C and m4/3.
The other method is to use the hyperfocal distance. With this you would choose an aperture of around f8-11 (with full frame) and use a calculator which takes into account your focal length, aperture and sensor size. It then gives you the hyperfocal distance which is the distance to focus at that would give you the maximum DOF, often being a very small distance. For example, if I shoot at 18mm, f8 on my Z7 this would give me a hyperfocal distance of 1.37m, a far cry from infinity focus, and will give you focus from 0.68m to infinity.
You can then of course use focus stacking to improve DOF of field even more.
For landscape I would always recommend setting ISO to base (to get the maximum dynamic range), setting your aperture accordingly and then let your shutter speed be whatever it needs to be to get the correct exposure. If you want to absolutely guarantee the best shot that you can then 'in theory' you should always use a tripod with external shutter release, even with fast shutter speeds.
Obviously this information is for the optimum picture and appreciate that you may have to veer away from this depending on the situation and equipment being used. For example, when I go on holiday I don't use a tripod. However, I use m4/3 on holiday and can use f4-5.6 to get large DOF and base ISO is 200 (as opposed to ISO 64 of my Z7) meaning shutter speed is generally higher.
@cowboymug something else you could try is searching on flickr to find images you like and then see what equipment was used to create them
We have to disagree, then ( snerkler, post 17 ).- As I understand a landscape is mainly trees ,or rocks and so on,across a wide field of view. Using a moderately wide-lens the DoF will be considerable even a couple of stops down, when focussed at the first scale-mark after infinity.... near-enough the hyperfocal distance ( without resort to charts/calculations ). A photo taken in a formal garden where some objects may be close( perhaps to emphasis the scale of the garden ), would not be a landscape, even though some of the content is at a considerable distance, compared with the closest objects.
This style of picture would indeed need some effort to achieve all parts sharp.
I believe that a landscape picture implies the objects are at a considerable distance - trees in a parkland. Even if thete is an attractive path leading to the distance, the need to have it all sharp will have an effect on the image quality as snerkler suggested.
In effect, you can't have it all.However, I'll agree that a remote shutter-release ( or the built-in timer), will eliminate mechanical shake if used with a tripod... something that SLRs suffered, with their heavy mirrors -hence the Canon pelicule... and more recently Sony ( digital) used a similar semi-mirror arrangement - However, with modern "Live" LCD viewing, there is nothing mechanical, except the photographer pushing the release. By placing the camera on a wall, using the self-timer should be considered, whenever possible, eliminating any induced shake. If the weight of a tripod is unacceptable.
- Er, unless that's a required effect.
Personally I try to carry a long-monopod, this allows use of the "Sweep Panorama mode" which stitches five frames together in the camera - the resulting image is considerably wider than any "wide-angle" yet without the distortion of a "Fisheye" . The only snag being if movement is close-by, then it can feature in more than one place..... some care is needed to inspect the frame afterwards - before moving on. If objects are needed sharp in a land (Sea?)-scape as well as infinity, then with modern computing it's easy enough to substitute a close-focussed image of the foreshore with sea and ships on the horizon.
Cheers.
OK the bit in bold I can agree on for certain situations (assuming we're not using an f2.8 lens or faster as that would still only give an aperture of f5.6 or wider), but this isn't what you said initially  Also, it will depend on the lens and where these focus marks are, what camera and focal length you are using, and of course the scene. Using this technique is a bit of a gamble, and won't often give you the best outcome. If you want to guarantee maximum sharpness front to back it is better to work it out correctly rather than taking a 'punt' at it. This is why I wish they'd put distance scales back on lenses, we wouldn't need calculators then.
Also landscapes are far more than rocks and trees 
Do you honestly think this is what I was referring to? 
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with this. A lot of time to make a landscape interesting you have something in the foreground which not only gives a point of interest it helps portray depth and distance to the image. I've taken plenty of shots where the foreground subject is less than 1m from the camera. Learning about the hyperfocal distance should give you an image that is sharp from front to back with no image quality issue.
Yep the built in timer is certainly a good idea, however this nor the shutter release help in the way that you say. Tripods and shutter releases/timers do not get rid of shutter shock or mirror slap, they only aid in movement caused by the user pressing the shutter button. More recent DSLRs have added functions like mirror up and electronic first curtain to get rid of shutter shock and mirror slap.
I don't know what the Canon pelicule is tbh so not sure about this "semi mirror" you are talking about, however even mirrorless cameras can still suffer shutter shock and once again no timer or shutter release will prevent this. Most mirrorless do offer electronic first curtain and/or full electronic shutter to prevent shutter shock.
Definitely an option, although my preference is still to use a tripod with multiple individual shots as there is then no risk of any hint of motion blur/camera shake.
Yep, people seem to be using composites more and more these days. I'm not a fan tbh as I like my images to be pretty much as they come out of the camera barring the minor tweaks in Lightroom. I'm a bit old school like that and still even use filters rather than blending multiple exposures in post 