Manual vs Auto focus IQ

[makion]

I've been reading more and more about the manual focus lenses that zeiss, samyang, leica have to offer and I have a huge question, why are these lenses often accredited with the sharpest lens award? The only trend i know is that they are 1) expensive as hell, so maybe the material used is as top as you can get, or 2) that the manual focus allows for yourself to see when the image is the sharpest.

Is it possible for Canon/Nikon to match these lenses(Manual OR Autofocus)? or will they purposely not do so because they would be developing lenses that 90% of their target market cannot afford?

Thanks in advance!

[CyberDyneSystems]

I doubt that the correlation you see between these MF lenses and sharpness is the result of any MF/Sharpness cause and effect.
Note the name Zeiss, and the cost of these MF only lenses, and you are a lot closer to finding your true cause and effect.

As to the idea of a reluctance to create a sharp lens with AF, no this theory too is looking in the wrong place..
You are missing the sharpest lenses made in your research, sharper than any Zeiss, those being the super-telephotos.

The 300m f/2.8, 200mm f/2, and 500mm f/4's of the world,.
...these are AF, and much sharper than anything Zeiss is making.

So the theory that Canon/Nikon won't make sharp AF lenses is disproven by their existence.

[gonzogolf]

Its the optics, not the focus. Like CyberDyneSystem says these names are the most respected lens companies for a reason, and many have been for decades.