Fujifilm XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II vs Tamron 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD
Every published spec side by side, with today's lowest prices for the market you've chosen.
Key differences
- Aperture blades: 11 on the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II, against 9 on the 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD.
- Closest focus: 0.19 m on the 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD, against 0.30 m on the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II.
- Optical stabilisation: Yes on the 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD, against No on the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II.
- Aperture ring: Yes on the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II, against No on the 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD.
- Weight: 410 g on the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II, against 525 g on the 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD.
XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II or 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD: which should you buy?
Choose the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II for its aperture blades, aperture ring and weight.
Choose the 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD for its closest focus and optical stabilisation.
On paper the XF 16-55mm F2.8 R LM WR II wins more rows (3 to 2); if the 17-70mm F/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD's strengths are the ones you shoot with, and its price is lower where you buy, it can still be the better buy.
 |  | |
|---|---|---|
| Lowest price today | $1,399.95 new | $599 new $554.75 used |
| Optics | ||
| Focal length | 16–55mm | 17–70mm |
| 35mm equivalent | 24–83mm equivalent | 26–105mm equivalent (27–112mm on Canon) |
| Maximum apertureLower f-number lets in more light. A zoom wins only when it is as bright at both ends. | f/2.8 | f/2.8 |
| Minimum aperture | f/22 | f/22 |
| Made for | APS-C | APS-C |
| Elements / groups | 16 / 11 | 16 / 12 |
| Aperture blades | 11 (best) | 9 |
| Closest focus | 0.30 m | 0.19 m (best) |
| Max magnification | 0.21× | 0.21× |
| Focus & handling | ||
| Autofocus | Yes (Linear) | Yes (RXD) |
| Optical stabilisation | No | Yes (best) |
| Weather sealed | Yes | Yes |
| Internal zoom | No | — |
| Aperture ring | Yes (best) | No |
| Teleconverter compatible | No | No |
| Size & weight | ||
| Weight | 410 g (best) | 525 g |
| Diameter × length | 78.3 × 95 mm | 74.6 × 119.3 mm |
| Filter thread | 72 mm | 67 mm |
Green marks the better figure where “better” is unambiguous. A dash means the maker doesn't publish it or we haven't verified it yet.