Canon
RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
Canon RF Mount
An incredibly compact, extending telephoto zoom with L-series optics and 5 stops of stabilization.
$2,799
Launch priceReleased Oct 2019
Nikon
NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S
Nikon Z Mount
NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S — 16–35mm f/4 for Nikon Z, a popular choice in the nikon lineup.
$1,699
Launch priceReleased Jan 2023
NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S is 3.2 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 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
Wins
NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S
TL;DR — Key differences
- ARF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM has higher OIS effectiveness (5 stops vs 0 stops)
- BNIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S has lower Weight (500 g vs 1070 g)
- BNIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S has lower Min focus distance (38 cm vs 70 cm)
- ARF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM has lower Max aperture (Wide) (f/2.8 vs f/4)
- ARF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM has lower Max aperture (Tele) (f/2.8 vs f/4)
Key specs at a glance
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 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 1 Super UD, 1 UD, 2 Aspherical
- ✓
OIS effectiveness
5 stops vs 0 stops — higher is better
- ✓
Optical stabilization
Only RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM supports it
- ✓
Max aperture (Wide)
f/2.8 vs f/4 — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Tele)
f/2.8 vs f/4 — lower is better
Reasons to choose the NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S
- ✓
Special elements
Adds Aspherical
- ✓
Weight
500 g vs 1070 g — lower is better
- ✓
Internal focus
Only NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S supports it
- ✓
Custom function button
Only NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S supports it
- ✓
Min focus distance
38 cm vs 70 cm — lower is better
- ✓
Length
120 mm vs 146 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Diameter
86 mm vs 90 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Max magnification
0.25 × vs 0.23 × — higher is better
Shared specifications
Weather sealing
Both support weather sealing
Control ring
Both support control ring
Pros & cons at a glance
Editorially curated highlights and trade-offs.
RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
Pros
- ✓Unbelievably compact storage size thanks to extending barrel
- ✓Very lightweight design (only 1070g)
- ✓Excellent center sharpness at all focal lengths
- ✓Dual Nano USM focus motors offer fast, silent AF
- ✓Exceptional 5-stop optical image stabilization
Cons
- –Extending barrel can draw in dust/moisture over time
- –Not compatible with RF teleconverters (due to rear element position)
- –Vignetting is quite heavy wide open
NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S
Pros
- ✓Versatile zoom range covers multiple focal lengths in one lens
- ✓Weather-sealed construction for outdoor shooting
- ✓Native Nikon Z mount compatibility
Cons
- –Slower maximum aperture limits low-light performance
- –Third-party or older alternatives may offer better value
Decided which one is right for you?
Compare live prices for the RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM and NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S at major authorized retailers.
Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM
Nikon NIKKOR Z 16-35mm f/4 S
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 May 2026.