So my wife and I shoot a wide array of subjects.

She shoots concerts and live events semi-professionally, and I’m really active with my aquarium photography and social media (I’m a brand ambassador for 2 aquarium companies), as well as I like to do a lot of nature photography - just general scenes, not particularly wide angle landscapes, wildlife or birding however. And we have two young girls we snap photos of frequently.

We’ve recently upgraded to a Z6 after years with a D3400 that we quickly outgrew.

We have the Z5 kit lens (24-50 f/4-6.3) that we purchased along with our Z6 body as an entry point to Z-lenses, although I’m regretting not springing on the 24-70 f/4 S instead… as I don’t really care for the 24-50 much after using it.

We still have an F-mount 35 f/1.8 and a 70-300 f/4.5-6.3 from our DSLR days and already have an FTZ adapter, so we have some options focal length wise both near and with some reach - we’re just really looking for an all-purpose zoom.

Originally I was pretty set on the 24-70 f/4 S as our next lens to really replace the 24-50, and keep the S lens as an all purpose shooting lens, but then I got shopping around more into my Z lens options that were similar, and stumbled across the 24-75 f/2.8 and second guessed my original plan entirely.

I guess my question is for people who have both lenses is: is the quality difference of the S lens enough to worry about versus a non-S option?

Because I really think I’d appreciate the wider aperture of a f/2.8, even if it is a little more expensive lens - especially now that I realized there is another native Z lens with basically the same focal length range.

Especially with my wife shooting a lot of concerts that are often dark at times, I feel like the f/2.8 offers more versatility, so I’m second guessing myself and looking for first hand opinions of those who’ve used both side by side.

TIA