In article <4i30tq$int@columbia.cs.ubc.ca>, gates@cs.ubc.ca says...

>I don't mean to fuel the feud between the Canonites and Nikonians,
>but I've heard and am almost starting to believe that in general
>Nikon lenses have significantly better _contrast_ than Canon lenses.
>(The better contrast supposedly comes from a better coating on >Nikkors.) I'd love to compare 100 pairs of slides from, say, an EF >70-200/2.8 and a 80-200/2.8D AIS ED AF, but I haven't had the >opportunity yet. Any opinions?

(I probably shouldn't touch this one...., but:) Not having tried
side-by-side Nikkor-Canon comparisons, I cannot say, but a local
photographer who had a Canon outfit, including some "L" lenses,
and who switched to a Nikon outfit with similar focal-lengths did
comment that he thought the Nikkors had higher contrast in general
than his Canon lenses. Also, I have used MANY Nikkors (see "SLE[MN]"),
and the lenses in the line do seem to be remarkable consistent in
contrast, color balance, and sharpness - regardless of price.
When it comes to the top recent Canon lenses (not the bottom cheaper
end of the line), I could be convinced that it would be hard to tell
the difference between the lines in image quality. But at the middle
and bottom end of the lines, I would expect more difference, with
the nod generally going to the Nikkors.
Hope This Helps