Fujifilm
GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift)
Fujifilm GFX Mount
Medium-format tilt-shift with ±8.5° tilt and ±11mm shift for architecture and product work.
$1,699
Launch priceReleased Apr 2019
Fujifilm
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR
Fujifilm X Mount
The pro-grade standard zoom for X-mount camera bodies, delivering prime-like performance.
$1,199
Launch priceReleased Jan 2015
GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift) is 4.3 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 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift)
Wins
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR
2 categories tied
Which would you choose?
TL;DR — Key differences
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR has lower Max aperture (Wide) (f/2.8 vs f/3.5)
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR has lower Max aperture (Tele) (f/2.8 vs f/3.5)
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR has lower Weight (655 g vs 770 g)
- BXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR has lower Diameter (83 mm vs 89 mm)
- AGF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift) has higher Max magnification (0.17 × vs 0.16 ×)
Key specs at a glance
Size and weight, to scale
📸 Snap this lens size diff to shareGF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift)
⌀89 × 110 mm
770 g (1.70 lb / 27.16 oz)
Credit card
85.6 × 54 mm
for scale
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR
⌀83 × 106 mm
655 g (1.44 lb / 23.10 oz)
GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift) is 4mm longer and 6mm wider than XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR.
GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift) is 115 g heavier than XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR.
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 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift)
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 2 Aspherical, 1 ED
- ✓
Control ring
Only GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift) supports it
- ✓
Custom function button
Only GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift) supports it
- ✓
Max magnification
0.17 × vs 0.16 × — higher is better
Reasons to choose the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 3 Aspherical, 3 ED
- ✓
Max aperture (Wide)
f/2.8 vs f/3.5 — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Tele)
f/2.8 vs f/3.5 — lower is better
- ✓
Weight
655 g vs 770 g — lower is better
- ✓
Diameter
83 mm vs 89 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Length
106 mm vs 110 mm — lower is better
Shared specifications
Min focus distance
Both 30 cm
Internal focus
Both support internal focus
Weather sealing
Both support weather sealing
Pros & cons at a glance
Editorially curated highlights and trade-offs.
GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift)
Pros
- ✓Weather-sealed construction for outdoor shooting
- ✓Solid optical performance for the price tier
- ✓Native Fujifilm GFX mount compatibility
Cons
- –Third-party or older alternatives may offer better value
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR
Pros
- ✓Incredible center-to-corner sharpness across the range
- ✓Professional weather-resistant build quality
- ✓Twin Linear Motors deliver rapid, near-silent autofocus
- ✓Dedicated physical aperture ring
Cons
- –No optical image stabilization
- –Relatively heavy and bulky for an APS-C lens (655g)
- –Filter size of 77mm is large for X-series accessories
Decided which one is right for you?
Compare live prices for the GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift) and XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR at major authorized retailers.
Fujifilm GF 30mm F3.5 R WR (Tilt-Shift)
Fujifilm XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR
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.