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
Fujifilm
XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro
Fujifilm X Mount
XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro — 60mm f/2.4 for Fujifilm X, a popular choice in the fujifilm lineup.
$649
Launch priceReleased Jan 2012
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II is 13.1 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
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
Wins
XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro
1 categories tied
TL;DR — Key differences
- BXF 60mm F2.4 R Macro has higher Max magnification (1 × vs 0.21 ×)
- BXF 60mm F2.4 R Macro has lower Weight (215 g vs 410 g)
- BXF 60mm F2.4 R Macro has lower Length (80 mm vs 122 mm)
- BXF 60mm F2.4 R Macro has lower Max aperture (Wide) (f/2.4 vs f/2.8)
- BXF 60mm F2.4 R Macro has lower Max aperture (Tele) (f/2.4 vs f/2.8)
Key specs at a glance
Size and weight, to scale
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
⌀78 × 122 mm
410 g (0.90 lb / 14.46 oz)
Credit card
85.6 × 54 mm
for scale
XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro
⌀70 × 80 mm
215 g (0.47 lb / 7.58 oz)
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II is 42mm longer and 8mm wider than XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro.
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II is 195 g heavier than XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro.
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 XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 4 Aspherical, 3 ED, 1 Super ED
- ✓
Weather sealing
Only XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II supports it
- ✓
Control ring
Only XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II supports it
Reasons to choose the XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro
- ✓
Special elements
Adds Aspherical
- ✓
Max magnification
1 × vs 0.21 × — higher is better
- ✓
Weight
215 g vs 410 g — lower is better
- ✓
Length
80 mm vs 122 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Wide)
f/2.4 vs f/2.8 — lower is better
- ✓
Max aperture (Tele)
f/2.4 vs f/2.8 — lower is better
- ✓
Diameter
70 mm vs 78.3 mm — lower is better
- ✓
Min focus distance
28 cm vs 30 cm — lower is better
Shared specifications
Internal focus
Both support internal focus
Pros & cons at a glance
Editorially curated highlights and trade-offs.
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
XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro
Pros
- ✓Lightweight design easy to carry all day
- ✓Solid optical performance for the price tier
- ✓Native Fujifilm X mount compatibility
Cons
- –Third-party or older alternatives may offer better value
Decided which one is right for you?
Compare live prices for the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II and XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro at major authorized retailers.
Fujifilm XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro
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.