Comparing with point and shoot?
I've used Nikon SLR (not DSLR) for film - no complain
My first digital - Point & Shoot compact A95 - very sharp! But it's "Sharpened" by camera algorithm
My first DSLR - Canon EOS 350D - compared with my compact, it's much softer. But I concluded it's due to camera algorithm. It sharpens way much lesser than a point and shoot.
Showed the output to a small group of my friends who's not into photography and they said images taken using my A95 is more appealing - sharper, more contrasty.
So what I did was to post process - sharpen a little, boosted contrast n brightness a little, and I'm done! Sharp, contrasty, yet "natural" looking. Not overly sharpened, overly punchy colours.
As for Nikon is sharper.. well, just got to know that different camera (even under same brand) may differs in its algorithm. Also, Nikon's kit lenses are better than Canon's.
Canon's EF-S 18-55 do have dozens of lemon copies out there.. Must be lucky enough to get a better copy. Even then, low light focusing is
But since I shoot more towards telephoto end, I've decided to "skimp" on wide angle, use the kit lens, and bought a 70-200 F4L non IS instead