Fujifilm
GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR
Fujifilm GFX Mount
GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR — 120mm f/4 for Fujifilm GFX, a popular choice in the fujifilm lineup.
$2,699
Launch priceReleased Jan 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 6 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
GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR
Wins
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
Which would you choose?
TL;DR — Key differences
- AGF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR has higher OIS effectiveness (5 stops vs 0 stops)
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II has lower Weight (410 g vs 1520 g)
- AGF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR has higher Max magnification (0.5 × vs 0.21 ×)
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II has lower Min focus distance (30 cm vs 45 cm)
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II has lower Max aperture (Wide) (f/2.8 vs f/4)
Key specs at a glance
Size and weight, to scale
📸 Snap this lens size diff to shareGF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR
⌀89 × 152 mm
1520 g (3.35 lb / 53.62 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)
GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR is 30mm longer and 11mm wider than XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II.
GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR is 1110 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 GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR
- ✓
OIS effectiveness
5 stops vs 0 stops — higher is better
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 2 ED
- ✓
Optical stabilization
Only GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR supports it
- ✓
Custom function button
Only GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR supports it
- ✓
Max magnification
0.5 × vs 0.21 × — higher is better
Reasons to choose the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
- ✓
Weight
410 g vs 1520 g — lower is better
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 4 Aspherical, 3 ED
- ✓
Min focus distance
30 cm vs 45 cm — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Wide)
f/2.8 vs f/4 — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Tele)
f/2.8 vs f/4 — lower is better
- ✓
Length
122 mm vs 152 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Diameter
78.3 mm vs 89 mm — lower is better
Shared specifications
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.
GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR
Pros
- ✓Built-in optical image stabilization
- ✓Weather-sealed construction for outdoor shooting
- ✓Native Fujifilm GFX mount compatibility
Cons
- –Premium price point
- –Relatively heavy for extended handheld use
- –Slower maximum aperture limits low-light performance
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 GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR and XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II at major authorized retailers.
Fujifilm GF 120mm F4 R Macro OIS WR
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.