To get things straight from the off, I am not a pano-stitch freak.. not sure I am even that much of a fan, TBH....
It seemed like a gimmick when I bought my first Digi-Compact err.... fifteen years back? And the sales-man said
"Zoom Lenses are as dead as film!"... err... yeah... the thing didn't even have an optical zoom, the salesman raving about the 'digital' zoom for greater tele, and then pointing at the stitching software that came on the included disc, for 'as much wide as you want!"... even more, err.... I think...... think... therefore I err! lol
Err.. where was I? Oh yeah... listening to some spotty faced oik almost two decades ago, trying to flog me a little pocket camera, and tell me that twenty odd years of film and a City & Guilds in this subject were all completely out of date and redundant.. '
cos widgetal'....... Drafty though, a lot of what the burger-flipper predicted has come to pass... I think a lot is self-full-fulling-prophesy in a way, enough people shout "Digital is the Future" loudly enough, people start to believe it and it becomes self perpetuating, the 'advances' in technology directed by customer demands and expectations, those so much set by the marketing, and around the circle it goes again..... but still......
Daftly, it took until maybe six or seven years ago, long after I had killed that early Digi-Pact, that I found the disc with the camera-software on it, and decided to have a shufty at it all..... the pano program had, very rapidly, after I bought the camera been deleted from the computer.... it was to my mind very much a gimmick, and it took so much processor power, I don't think I ever made a pano with the thing without the computer locking up or blue-screening on me with a memory error! Though, I have to admit I didn't try very hard..... A couple of computers later, and with a little more RAM and a lot more HD space.... "Oh!.. It wurks!" and I gave it another whirl...
Co-incidentally I had just bought the 4.5mm fish for crop-sensor widgetal, and it was interesting to see what it could do.... and as interesting to see that Photo-Shop included it in the version I upgraded to about the same time..... Did NOT convince me that I shouldn't buy the UWA..... but it IS remarkable how much you can do with Kit+Stitch....
Yes, a tripod can be handy... but its not essential.... some I believe have gone as far as special indexed heads to make stitch sections..... but,
Kit and stitch with the aproximate coverage of a UWA at 12mm... could do with cropping square, but it was a quick, rough and ready comparison, with the Sigg7 8-16 UWA.(nicked from Tutorial
Ultra-Wide-Angle vs Kit & Stitch, featuring a fish!)
Same shot with the siggy, at 10mm.. its a tad wider... but interesting how the stitch has maintained the vertices better, and the church doesn't look like its falling over backwards.
Kit shot was made from just 3 sections, hand held..... like I said, was rough and ready.... but, shows the potential, and with just a little care and attension to what you are about, you can get well into UWA terratory with pano-stitching, without lugging about a tripod or index head, or spending a lot of money on a UWA.....
NO! there are circumstances its no substitute for a UWA - Lens... in same way that cropping from Fish isn't either.... conclusion of Tut those two were taken from, is that they are three distinct 'tools' with different merits, if a lot of possible over-lap, in the tool-box of 'wide-Phoptography', neither is a substitute for another, they all have their merits and drawbacks...
But... as a toe in the water of wide..... Kit&Stitch DOES have a lot to offer..... for starts, its CHEAP! No added gadgets need be bought.
Yup, does take some time in post-process, and it can be rather hit and miss whether you get the sections you need, and software can stitch'em.... but, I could have spent as much time in Post-Process trying to key-stone out converging verticles in the UWA shot, or de-fishing and cropping the 180deg shot with the fish.... its all swings and roundabouts and ways of skinning cats, as they say....
Your little boy shot? No you couldn't have got that with kit&Stitch because of the motion between merge frames... on the other hand.... you probably could have got it backing up a bit with a longer lens, or something no less impact....
Back to skinning cats.... and Kit+Stitch is just one tool in the tool-box.. a very cheap one..... and as the old adage, its a bad workman that blames his tools..... a good workman would have the more suitable tool for the job in his box, but would also probably not be utterly stuck if he'd left it at home, and improvised.
Advice against leaping into the wide-side with a UWA.. OP says they haven't got all they could from the kit 18-55.... A UWA, then is as likely to bring far more niggles and drawbacks learning where one is more or less apropriate than anything else, let alone might be exploited, and kit&Stitch,, down and dirty, is cheap... its certainly a lot less to lugg up and down big hills or around town on holiday, it does have a lot merit, for the few occassions you might really want to go that wide, and might actually get the benefit of going wide, and a newby likely will get more shots they like, being limited to the tried and trusted of a moderate mid-range zoom, than trying to get to grips with the foibles of something completely new, that IS peculiarly tricky to come top terms with.
I was, earlier trying to follow the plot of links to photo's the OP said she wanted to make pics 'like', and it was intriguing, that so many of them actually didn't exploit UWA very much.... a lot were made by effect, often in the colour, or in slow-shutter; more found drama or impact in forground interest... in short, those photo's merits, where there was any, was NOT generated by the lens, but by filters or subject or old fashioned, back to basics composition. Where there was obvious 'wideness' it was like the church example, skew vertices, falling backwards buildings and un-natural perspective, that is a feature of a wide, that some may deem 'effect'... like fishiness.... but, lens makers will actually try and dial out as 'distortion' in their rectilinear corrections, and software will try and 'correct' even more with lens profiles! Which poses an interesting argument about one mans rubbish... but still....
Conundrum... twenty odd years ago I back-packed round northern India, with a camera bag, packing a couple of SLR's, a lot of film, four or five lenses, filters, etc etc... oh, and the trusty little XA2 compact in my pocket!
What would I take today?
Curiously, the same camera bag is now filled with just one D3200 'crop-sensor' (and one of the smaller ones at that!!) DSLR's! The fish, the 8-16, kit and 55-300, dont actually give me any more range of lens, but do take up more space... the flash gun and the film have been evicted to fit them in! So much for the miracle of silicon miniaturisation! I don't even think that it is any lighter, even though there were a couple of motor-winders and spare batteries in the bag quarter of a century ago.....When I went on that trip, it was sort of a case of taking all as I didn't know what I would find..... now I do.... and of the digi-kit of today, as alluded, one camera and lenses with less range than I used 25 years ago, takes up more space..... all up, I would PROBABLY leave the lot behind.... and pack the trusty XA2 film compact again..... its diddy, it has cracking resolution, and it's batteries don't go flat for YEARS! Would need to take film with me of course... but meh! Somewhat more discerning these days, I'd be more inclined to make every frame count... meanwhile, the lack of 'zoom' would beg more for thought and finding the angle, as well as discernment over whether a scene really was worth a frame..... Might not get so many photo's but probably more that I liked... and I'd not be sweating so profusely on the 'Tourist-Bus' lugging so much gear about, or worried about where to put it between the chickens and the goat, or it being snatched by the little urchin as I got off, etc etc etc.....and could spend more time enjoying the trip, rather than playing cameras.....
Maybe you have to experience that over-load of excess to better appreciate why and where it may actually be more of a handicap than an advantage.