Has anyone used the Nikon Monarch Rangefinder 800? It is smaller and looked better designed from an ergonomics standpoint. It has the continuous ranging feature too. Less expensive. I am trying to see if there is any reason for spending the extra money on the Leica for hunting purposes.
Nikon Monarch 800 rangefinder vs. Leica 900
- Thread starter dave3006
- Start date
- Status
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
My Bushnell 800 works just fine. I've not used it when hunting but I've gotten readings off isolated bushes and from large boulders, out at 600 and 800 yards.
Art
Art
I bought a Bushnell Yardage Pro 800 for me then got my wife a Leica 900 after trying to cheap it for her with an atrocious Bushnell Scout. Although the Bushnell 800 is functional, there is no comparison in terms of optics and ranging ability on smaller objects. Whether the price differential is justified depends upon your needs.
Sorry, but I don't know about the Nikon product.
Edited primarily to correct Bushnell product names.
Sorry, but I don't know about the Nikon product.
Edited primarily to correct Bushnell product names.
Last edited:
Bottom Gun
Member
I have a Nikon which I am pleased with. The optics are good quality and it functions just like I expected.
I checked the accuracy with a tape when I first got it and found it to be right on the money.
Hope that helps.
I checked the accuracy with a tape when I first got it and found it to be right on the money.
Hope that helps.
as somebody who spends a lot of time camped out behind lasers for prairie dog, antelope, mule deer, and whitetail deer, let me say that yes, there is good reason to spend the money on the leica.
a bushnell 600 or bigger will suffice, but i gotta tell ya, when you have an antelope laying out at an estimated 400 yards, and you just can't, for love or money, get your laser to get a reading for you, you will get a bit irritated w/ it. also, when you are sitting on a dog town in bright sun, and the laser spits out readings only erratically, and some of those readings you know are in error, you will start to get mad...
last i knew, bushnell and nikon were made by the same folks. spend the money on a leica - you won't regret it. a bushnell/nikon will work most of the time, and make you happy most of the time, but there are occasions when it will come up short - always at a critical time. avoid, at all costs the simmons/tasco.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,341
No question about it..Not even a second thought the Leica is worth ever penny!!!
Nikon is a major loser compared to the Leica they are not even in the same galaxy the Lieca is so far superior it's not even funny. You are money ahead to just spend the money now and get a a lieca LRF900 or 1200. It is without a doubt the finest most rugged and most trustworthy rangefinder on the market.
I have a friend who has a Nikon. On a side by side comparison the Nikon is at least 50% less reliable than the Leica. The Nikon works but not under all lighting conditions. The leica will range to 900yards PERIOD no matter what the lighting is and it'll do a whole lot better most of the time. I've seen conditions where the Nikon won't read out to 400 yards no matter what.
Don't short yourself get the real deal the first time!
Nikon is a major loser compared to the Leica they are not even in the same galaxy the Lieca is so far superior it's not even funny. You are money ahead to just spend the money now and get a a lieca LRF900 or 1200. It is without a doubt the finest most rugged and most trustworthy rangefinder on the market.
I have a friend who has a Nikon. On a side by side comparison the Nikon is at least 50% less reliable than the Leica. The Nikon works but not under all lighting conditions. The leica will range to 900yards PERIOD no matter what the lighting is and it'll do a whole lot better most of the time. I've seen conditions where the Nikon won't read out to 400 yards no matter what.
Don't short yourself get the real deal the first time!
I have used a Nikon and a Bushnell, and the Leica is hands down the best. Under nice calm normal conditions they all will suffice, but when you have poor visibility, like rain, snow, fog, haze (varmint hunting) or breezes that blow the bushes sideways, the Leica rises to the top. Also on dim non-reflective targets at maximum range, the Leica will outperform all the rest. Did I also mention that the Leica has optics that are second to none, and that the battery life is 50% longer than the competitions? Good.....I would like to mention that now..... I own a Leice 1200, but that does not change the facts...It costs more, because it is more....
berettashotgun
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2005
- Messages
- 1,149
have an older leica, purchased "new" in '99. Ticked me off that the single lens(7X28?) in the rangefinder was BETTER than the Nikon Monarch in low light/dusk conditions. I think they could have made the corners a little more rounded- that thing is always getting stuck in my pocket, but that's not necessarily a bad thing- after losing my keys once 
- Status
