Fujifilm
GF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR
Fujifilm GFX Mount
GF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR — 250mm f/4 for Fujifilm GFX, a popular choice in the fujifilm lineup.
$3,299
Launch priceReleased Jan 2018
Fujifilm
XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II
Fujifilm X Mount
XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II — 56mm f/1.2 for Fujifilm X, a popular choice in the fujifilm lineup.
$999
Launch priceReleased Sep 2022
XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II is 4.7 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 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR
Wins
XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II
Which would you choose?
TL;DR — Key differences
- AGF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR has higher OIS effectiveness (5 stops vs 0 stops)
- BXF 56mm F1.2 R WR II has lower Min focus distance (30 cm vs 140 cm)
- BXF 56mm F1.2 R WR II has lower Max aperture (Wide) (f/1.2 vs f/4)
- BXF 56mm F1.2 R WR II has lower Max aperture (Tele) (f/1.2 vs f/4)
- BXF 56mm F1.2 R WR II has lower Weight (445 g vs 1425 g)
Key specs at a glance
Size and weight, to scale
📸 Snap this lens size diff to shareGF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR
⌀108 × 204 mm
1425 g (3.14 lb / 50.27 oz)
Credit card
85.6 × 54 mm
for scale
XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II
⌀70 × 112 mm
445 g (0.98 lb / 15.70 oz)
GF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR is 92mm longer and 38mm wider than XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II.
GF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR is 980 g heavier than XF 56mm F1.2 R 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 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 2 ED, 1 Super ED
- ✓
OIS effectiveness
5 stops vs 0 stops — higher is better
- ✓
Optical stabilization
Only GF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR supports it
- ✓
Custom function button
Only GF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR supports it
- ✓
Max magnification
0.22 × vs 0.15 × — higher is better
Reasons to choose the XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II
- ✓
Special elements
Adds Aspherical, ED
- ✓
Min focus distance
30 cm vs 140 cm — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Wide)
f/1.2 vs f/4 — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Tele)
f/1.2 vs f/4 — lower is better
- ✓
Weight
445 g vs 1425 g — lower is better
- ✓
Length
112 mm vs 203.5 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Diameter
70 mm vs 108 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 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR
Pros
- ✓Prime design typically delivers strong sharpness and lighter weight
- ✓Built-in optical image stabilization
- ✓Weather-sealed construction for outdoor shooting
Cons
- –Premium price point
- –Relatively heavy for extended handheld use
- –Slower maximum aperture limits low-light performance
XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II
Pros
- ✓Bright f/1.2 aperture for low light and subject separation
- ✓Prime design typically delivers strong sharpness and lighter weight
- ✓Weather-sealed construction for outdoor shooting
Cons
- –Third-party or older alternatives may offer better value
Decided which one is right for you?
Compare live prices for the GF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR and XF 56mm F1.2 R WR II at major authorized retailers.
Fujifilm GF 250mm F4 R LM OIS WR
Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R 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.