Maybe I'm simply an ignorant fool, but I have to ask this question anyway:
At events, I mostly carry two camera bodies (plus a backup in the car) with different lenses for different needs. Since light isn't always abundant and since I sometimes need to take portraits with a blurred background, those lenses tend to be f/2.8. My need mostly vary between wide for groups and long for portraits, to simplify it. So I should have two zoom lenses, one for wide and one for longer shots, but I haven't and there ain't none
The typical standard zoom is 24-70mm. That's sometimes too short for a close portrait and sometimes too long for a large group or even smaller groups if space is very limited. So, I would have to carry a telezoom, in my case the Nikon 80-200 AF-S, which is a beast, and a wide zoom, which I solve with the GH3 and 7-14mm. Then I need another body to cover the mid-range. This starts to get heavy.
So why don't camera/lens manufacturers make something like a full frame 18-50mm and 50-120mm f/2.8? With shorter zoom range, I'm sure they could even make them something like f/2.2? f/2.0? Am I the only person in the world who would buy lenses like that?
Yes, I know, I know... 24-120mm f/4 etc. But f/4 is still f/4 and not f/2.8. In the old days, Tamron actually made a 28-105mm f/2.8, but I've heard that it isn't stellar on digital full frame cameras. Or maybe I should try it?