In article <4uoias$4na@sdcc13.ucsd.edu>, cthorste@sdcc13.ucsd.edu says...
>In article <320EC998.1A99@idt.net>, dannyg1 wrote:
>>On another note, the 135/2 FD was a fantastic lens, easily the better of a
>>Nikkor 135/2

>I can confirm the quality of the FD 135mmf/2. I used to shoot studio
>portraits with this lens and a New F-1, and it's very sharp even wide open
>(although I usually shot at f/8). Haven't seen or used the new EF version,
>but if it's as good as the FD then it's worth it!! Haven't used the Nikkor
>either though, so I don't know how it would compare.

I have not compared them either, but the Nikkor 135mm f2 MF is very sharp wide-open to the corners at most distances, with some decline in the corners under 8' or so, and with fairly poor overall performance at minimum focus distance at wide apertures. If the earlier comparison between the Canon
and the Nikkor was made using close subjects, I could believe the
conclusion, but not if the subjects were beyond about 10' - the Nikkor
is amazingly crisp everywhere in the frame there, even at f2 (all the
way to infinity-focus, where it does show minor field curvature).
Hope This Helps