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
Sony
FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II
Sony E Mount
The ultimate standard zoom — incredibly sharp, exceptionally compact, and built for professionals.
$2,299
Launch priceReleased Apr 2022
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II is 2.8 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
FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II
3 categories tied
Which would you choose?
TL;DR — Key differences
- AXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II has lower Weight (410 g vs 695 g)
- BFE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II has higher Max magnification (0.32 × vs 0.21 ×)
- BFE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II has lower Min focus distance (21 cm vs 30 cm)
- AXF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II has lower Diameter (78.3 mm vs 88 mm)
- BFE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II has lower Length (120 mm vs 122 mm)
Key specs at a glance
Size and weight, to scale
📸 Snap this lens size diff to shareXF 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
FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II
⌀88 × 120 mm
695 g (1.53 lb / 24.52 oz)
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II is 2mm longer and 10mm narrower than FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II.
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II is 285 g lighter than FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM 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 XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 4 Aspherical, 3 ED, 1 Super ED
- ✓
Weight
410 g vs 695 g — lower is better
- ✓
Diameter
78.3 mm vs 88 mm — lower is better
Reasons to choose the FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II
- ✓
Special elements
Adds 2 XA (extreme aspherical), 3 Aspherical, 2 ED…
- ✓
Custom function button
Only FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II supports it
- ✓
Min focus distance
21 cm vs 30 cm — lower is better
- ✓
Max magnification
0.32 × vs 0.21 × — higher is better
- ✓
Length
120 mm vs 122 mm — lower is better
Shared specifications
Max aperture (Wide)
Both f/2.8
Max aperture (Tele)
Both f/2.8
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.
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
FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II
Pros
- ✓Outstanding sharpness across the entire zoom range
- ✓Remarkably small and lightweight for an f/2.8 zoom
- ✓Four XD Linear focus motors provide blazing-fast AF tracking
- ✓Excellent close-up magnification
- ✓De-clickable aperture ring and customized function buttons
Cons
- –No built-in optical image stabilization (relies on body IBIS)
- –High launch price
- –Aperture ring can be easily bumped if not locked
Decided which one is right for you?
Compare live prices for the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II and FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM II at major authorized retailers.
Fujifilm XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II
Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM 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.