[Klaus]

EF:
https://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/standard...ec/mtf.png

RF:
https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf50...ec/mtf.png

Massive difference here

[JJ_SO]

I'm just working with a graphical software which is messing up the generated figures - they appear to use something like that. I guess both are wrong
Canon can't be that much worse than Nikon, even if the f/1.8 and f/1.2 will play a bit of a role.

[Klaus]

Canon MTFs have always been simulated MTFs. And they are never comparable across manufacturers anyway.

[Brightcolours]

f1.8 is more than a stop smaller than f1.2, JJ_SO. That plays a huge role.Both in lens design, and in stopping down difference.
I doubt that the Canon is "much worse" at f1.8, but the Nikkor may be a tad better (Otus beater?).

[JJ_SO]

I guessed that both are wrong because I first thought its the same lens graph from different sources and because I guessed the new ML lens is more even towards the right side - I was suspecting the graphics don't show the actual lens. I didn't compare it to Nikon and am well aware of the aperture stop difference.

Otus beater? Maybe also DLSR limits stretcher, although it's not because of DSLR but because of the mounts of DLSRs. I'm really happy for both companies, they did well and the user will get an improvement - and not a copy of a Sony That Nikon uses a more conventional, less advanced set of features (like that option bar) was to be expected. I just didn't expect some of Canon's features. But with their market share, they need to show some cool stuff.