Originally posted by jsherman999 Or a FF lens made with a smaller max aperture to reduce size/cost, basically giving up some of the FF advantage and 'matching' aps-c. Any f/4 zooms for example (24-70 f/4, 70-200 f/4)
That's actually not a bad idea, since a 24-70 f/4 will be "DoF&FoV-equivalent" to a 16-45 f/2.6, i.e. not bad at all - presumably it will be "high ISO equivalent" too.
Question to those who may know: What is the most expensive lens to make: a high quality 16-50/f2.8 covering APS-C with good corner-to-corner quality, or a 24-70 f/4 with equally good FF coverage?