Nikon vs. the rest

[txsigus]

Hey guys just wanted to get some of you guys opinions. Am looking for a scope somewhere in the neighborhood of 700. Have 2 Nikon Monarchs that I am very pleased with clarity reticle, wear, etc. Yet, according to hunting buddies I am missing out on a much better scope by around $200. In someone's opinion am I missing that much by not opting for one of the Zeiss's or Leupolds around this price point. Interested in at least 14 power and for the $ in my experience Nikon has been great.



Thanks for the input

 

[ewoaf]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

Yeah, loose the Nikon in favor of something else with better features.

 

[txsigus]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

Why is it that much better? What kind of features will leup have that the monarch doesn't?

 

[aron]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

Within the same price range scope, I would take the monarch over a leupold.

 

[John M]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

For $369 you can own a Zeiss Conquest in a 3-9x40 and it will shock you with the difference in clarity and light gathering.

I'm a hunter and not a sniper. The Zeiss is hard to beat for the money.

 

[shoot4fun]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

Call me nuts but I think the Nikon Buckmaster scopes are actually better than Monarch. Especially for the price. I can echo what Bayou Boy says about Zeiss Conquest. My hunting rifles all wear them. I had trouble with the same ditch two weeks in a row a couple of years back. Long story short, I busted my ass twice in 5 days and the Conquest took a hard lick in the dirt. After the second time (no lectures please) I decided to verify zero. To my surprise it was still there. A lot of scopes couldn't have taken the lick.

 

[rdmega]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

I have fallen while hunting as well and the time I did my 9 pound rifle landed on frozen ground with my Nikon breaking my fall. It too held zero, plus with Nikons warranty and customer service they are hard to beat for the money. The Zeiss is a nice scope and appears a little bit sharper but its not like its the Diavari for the same price. In the price range I think the Monarch is hard to beat for a hunting scope. If you are looking for something more tactical then yes, you may want to look elsewhere but I would take the Nikon over the Leupy any day in that price.

 

[shoot4fun]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

Conquest is surely not Diavari. I never claimed that at all. I just said I like them better than Monarchs.
I have had trouble running out of adjustment on a couple of Monarchs in my day.
Maybe they are better now.

 

[rdmega]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

That is true, they do have very limited elevation. That was my biggest complaint as well. Even on the new Monarch X line and it has a 30mm. I still think for hunting its a tough scope to beat though, I havent needed to really adjust for hutning I just use hold over for fast shots.

 

[KillShot]

Re: Nikon vs. the rest

+1 for the Zeiss Conquest.