Re: rangefinder budget?
The Leupold rangefinders at least the RX4 I had left a lot to be desired. Both in how it worked which sucked big time and the glass quality which was absolutely horrible. It would not range consistently out to 400 yards I sold it and bought the Leica 1200 and could not be happier. The whole reflective and non reflective crap with the Leupold is a joke. With the Leica no matter what you point it at it works. Even if it is just the ground.
The Nikon ranges really well IMO. The one I played with worked better past 1200 than my Leica did. It seemed to pick up a few things at 1300 that my Leica could not. But that is asking a lot out of both of them since they are just rated at 1200. The farthest I have got with my Leica is 1360 something on a tree. We reached beyond 1400 with the Nikon I was playing with. The Nikon glass again does not even compare to the Leica.
I played with the Bushnell a bit and it seemed to range really well also. Easily ranged to 1300 which was the max I tried. But again glass quality does not compare to the Leica.
I realize glass quality is not the most important factor with a rangefinder, but it sure is nice to use when the glass looks as good as a ver nice scope vs looking through a $100 tasco. Sometimes you may not want to take your binos and the Leica is good enough to use as a monocular.
Plus the Leica is very small and compact, smaller than both the Nikon or Bushnell. Makes it easy to take with you.
I would rule out the Leica 800 since 1000 yards is a requirement. The Bushnell and Nikon are a lot cheaper than the Leica, but honestly in my using them they ranged just as good. So you would probably be happy with either of them. But I guarantee you will be happy with the Leica 1200 it is just a really nice piece of gear.
