First of all, f/2.8 on 70mm is much better than f/4 on 70mm - some cool bokeh closeups are possible, more opportunities for portraits (although shallow depth of field doesn't mean "better", just more options to choose).
As a person who normally uses a prime 50mm lens (f/1.8), I would say having f/4 as the widest aperture would be very sad to me - I photograph between 1.8 and 2.8 a lot. And by the way, 2.8 is one of my favorite stops.
A wider aperture (2.8 instead of 4) is much better for low-light photography, including night street photos.
2.8 on 24mm? Not so crucial but why not? You'll have a blur on closeups and more options in the case of low light.
It's about numbers above, but there is also "a quality of the glass" - let's call it this. Cheaper lenses - from my experience: unfocused areas can be ugly - image jitter instead of blur (уродское дребезжание изображения вместо размытия), bokeh can be very plain, and areas in shadows can look painted with dirty, unclear colors + problems with sharpness on the edge of the frame.
🙏🙏🙏