>>3257321First, you claimed that the cited lens is a DSLR 70-2.8 equivalent. It is not. When I proved to you that it's not, you didn't acknowledge that you were wrong, but instead diverted attention to something else. You need to acknowledge that you are subject to the higher standards of reason and evidence or else people (like me) won't take you seriously.
Second, the lens you cited costs $1000. People don't spend that kind of money just so they can properly expose photos. People spend $1000 on a lens because photography is an art form and they want a specialty lens that can do something artistic that their other lenses do not do.
Finally, even if people were buying f/2.8 zooms because of their "light value," whatever that means, there is not that much light gained from a single stop in aperture over a more consumer-grade f/4 lens, and the M43 systems have extremely competent IBIS to compensate for exactly the issue of shooting in low light with slow lenses.
