Canon
RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM
Canon RF Mount
The cornerstone zoom for Canon mirrorless, featuring 5 stops of optical image stabilization.
$2,399
Launch priceReleased Aug 2019
Fujifilm
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
Fujifilm X Mount
Second-gen flagship standard zoom — 410g, 72mm filter, de-clickable aperture, and 40MP-class resolution.
$1,199
Launch priceReleased Jan 2025
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II is 5.4 years newer.
Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, Cameraegg earns from qualifying purchases. Cameraegg may also earn commission from B&H links, at no extra cost to you.
Wins
RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM
Wins
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
2 categories tied
Which would you choose?
TL;DR — Key differences
- ARF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM has higher OIS effectiveness (5 stops vs 0 stops)
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II has lower Weight (410 g vs 900 g)
- ARF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM has lower Min focus distance (21 cm vs 30 cm)
- ARF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM has higher Max magnification (0.3 × vs 0.21 ×)
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II has lower Diameter (78.3 mm vs 88 mm)
Key specs at a glance
Size and weight, to scale
📸 Snap this lens size diff to share
RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM
⌀88 × 125 mm
900 g (1.98 lb / 31.75 oz)
Credit card
85.6 × 54 mm
for scale
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
⌀78 × 122 mm
410 g (0.90 lb / 14.46 oz)
RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM is 3mm longer and 10mm wider than XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II.
RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM is 490 g heavier than XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II.
Diameter (⌀) is the maximum barrel width; length is measured from the mount to the front of the lens.
Use-case scoring
Which one for what?
Algorithmic scores from verified specs · 10 = best in class
Why pick one over the other
Reasons to choose the RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 3 Aspherical, 3 UD
- ✓
OIS effectiveness
5 stops vs 0 stops — higher is better
- ✓
Optical stabilization
Only RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM supports it
- ✓
Min focus distance
21 cm vs 30 cm — lower is better
- ✓
Max magnification
0.3 × vs 0.21 × — higher is better
Reasons to choose the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 4 Aspherical, 3 ED, 1 Super ED
- ✓
Weight
410 g vs 900 g — lower is better
- ✓
Diameter
78.3 mm vs 88 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Length
122 mm vs 125 mm — lower is better
Shared specifications
Max aperture (Wide)
Both f/2.8
Max aperture (Tele)
Both f/2.8
Internal focus
Both support internal focus
Weather sealing
Both support weather sealing
Control ring
Both support control ring
Pros & cons at a glance
Editorially curated highlights and trade-offs.
RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM
Pros
- ✓Built-in optical image stabilization (up to 5 stops)
- ✓Excellent L-series sharpness and build quality
- ✓Fast and silent Nano USM focus motor
- ✓Very low chromatic aberration
Cons
- –Heavier than competitive options (900g)
- –Pricey entry threshold
- –Minor barrel distortion at 24mm
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
Pros
- ✓37% lighter than Mk I (410g vs 655g)
- ✓De-clickable aperture ring for video
- ✓0.3m close focus across zoom range
Cons
- –No optical IS — relies on body IBIS
- –Premium price for APS-C
Decided which one is right for you?
Compare live prices for the RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM and XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II at major authorized retailers.
Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM
Fujifilm XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, Cameraegg earns from qualifying purchases. Cameraegg may also earn commission from B&H links, at no extra cost to you.
Full specifications
✓ = category winner
Specs sourced from manufacturer data. Use-case scores algorithmically derived. Last reviewed June 2026.