Rifle Scopes Nikon Prostaff for hunting?

[dill84]

I am looking to get the general feelings on the Prostaff line. I want a decent economical optic for a 7mm Rem Mag that is a 3-9 or 2-10 variable. I plan on shooting from 100-300yds so, perhaps a BDC reticle might be in order as I don't want to deal with target turrets on this gun. Any other options around $200 with a mil/leo discount would be appreciated to.
Thanks

 

[phillip61]

Re: Nikon Prostaff for hunting?

I have a Nikon 3X9 on my 30.06. it's been on there for 5 years now and has never given me a problem. Very clear glass.

 

[Icallem]

Re: Nikon Prostaff for hunting?

My nephew has a 3-9 Prostaff and he gets along fine with it. It is on a rifle that is used only for hunting deer.

I would think that on a 7mm, you could just zero @ 200 and not have much trouble in the 100-300 range. YMMV

 

[Chingon]

Re: Nikon Prostaff for hunting?

Had one on my M1A for a spell. Impressed with the glass for the price. Depending on what you want to do with your rifle, you should have no problem hitting on target at about 300 yards or so.

 

[vferguson3006]

Re: Nikon Prostaff for hunting?

I have 4 Nikon's two Prostaff's, a Buckmaster and a Monarch.
They are pretty good scopes for the money.
When you look thru the Prostaff 3-9x40 glass the whole area, then pick up a 3-9x50 and repeat. They may be about $30 more but I think you will be impressed with the difference between the 40mm Obj. and the 50mm Obj.
Just another thought.

 

[slowr1der]

Re: Nikon Prostaff for hunting?

I had a 3-9x40 Prostaff, but it was the model that was for sale about 2 years ago. I've not had the newer one. It was a decent scope, but decent was about it in my opinion. I had it on a hunting rifle and it had decent glass, stayed zeroed through lots of abuse, etc. I did see a lot of chromatic aberration with the Prostaff which was my biggest issue with the glass. Low light performance was decent as well, but not exceptional. Basically for a hunting rifle I don't think you will have any problems and it is a good scope for that purpose. I ended up selling it when I upgraded to a Monarch. IMO I didn't see much of a difference in glass quality comparing the Prostaff side by side to the Monarch I replaced it with, however the Monarch does have better turrets.

However, the Burris FFII's are similarly priced, have a lot better glass both in daylight and low light, better turrets, and seem just as durable. If it wasn't for this choice I'd like the Prostaffs in this price range, but with the FFII out there and considering how much better it is, I just don't see a reason to get a Prostaff. The FFII imo is quite a bit better than the Monarch as well. If I used the rifles I have with Monarchs more, I'd probably replace them with something else.

 

[A.Redd]

Re: Nikon Prostaff for hunting?

Yes, I've slowly have upgraded all my scopes because i like the more expensive features; however, it really doesnt take much to kill a deer if thats all you are using it for. I've used much worse glass than prostaff in very low light situations and never thought i had a problem. I had a prostaff for years on a 17hmr and it has killed alot varmints at very low light conditions. Like a previous poster said i would jump up to 50mm scope, but not really necessary, fine scope.