[Brightcolours]

Well, until recently the situation in the Canon camp was pretty muddled - there were the L lenses and the non-L consumer fare, with good units being few and far between (85/1.8 being a well known exception). When the 100/2.8 macro and 70-300 IS were phased out in favour of the L models, I had a feeling they're going to drop the non-L/non-EFS line completely, leaving maybe the old 50/1.8. Now, of course, with full frame becoming increasingly affordable, they've thankfully made up their mind and started updating that stuff. But Nikon is still far ahead here, maybe in part because they do not have a well-defined "top-of-the-line" designation like L in Canon land.

The Canon 100mm f2.8 L IS USM Macro is not really more expensive than the Nikkor 105mm f2.8 VR Micro, which phased out the 105mm f2.8 non-VR predecessor.  So it is the same difference there, really. The Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM still lives happily in the Cano line-up... It was not phased out.

 

Canon started to freshen up its line-up with the 24mm f2.8 IS USM, 28mm f2.8 IS USM and 35mm f2 IS USM before they even started to freshen up the L lineup... And before Nikon started to bring their f1.8 models. The difference between what Canon did and Nikon is that Canon started with f2.8/2 with image stabilization, and Nikon with f1.8 primes.

 

Nikon had a lot of catching up to do, with bringing AF-S primes, and even a 35mm f1.4 with AF. Not sure why you see the Nikon line up as being far ahead. Yes, their 20mm f1.8 is a better lens than the ageing Canon 20mm f1.8 USM.

 

But, this is a Pentax thread.... Yes, Pentax has a lot of work to do still, to give the upcoming (....) FF model a viable lens lineup.