Canon lenses vs Nikon lenses: Which are better? - 1

Who makes better lenses, and why do you think so?

There's no good answer to this. They both have good and not so good lenses.

I would not say that any of them generally make better lenses than the other. You need to compare specific lenses.

Neither makes better lenses, necessarily. Nikon does have a much larger line of lenses; but this is because of their lens mounts- many older Nikon lenses will still work (with impaired function- no metering or autofocus) on even Nikon's newest D3100, 3200, 5100, D7000, etc. Canon lenses throughout their history have had more lens mount designs, so less of a selection is available today for EOS bodies, without additional specialized adapters.

I've shot Nikon, and nothing but. I love the quality of some of the prime lenses I've used, they were sharp, crisp and the color rendition was great. Canon users have said similar things about their lenses, and love them just as much as I love my Nikon glass.

They both make excellent lenses as do third parties like Sigma.

When you compare the top of the line lenses, there's almost no noticeable difference.

I just compared a few camera + lens combos on DxO Mark for someone and it seemed that - at least at the entry level - Canon lenses were about one percent better than Nikon, but Nikon sensors were about one percent better than Canon.

I'm sure that one brand will have a better 70-200 lens and the other will have a better 24-70 and so on throughout the line, so you can't make a blanket statement.

Each maker has an excellent line of lenses and cameras and there are other reasons to choose one brand over the other.