Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Nikon Monarch vs. Leupold....making a decision |
Post Reply |
Author | |
bbush
Optics Apprentice Joined: October/12/2008 Location: Mississippi Status: Offline Points: 93 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: September/10/2009 at 20:38 |
In a comparison between Nikon Monarch riflescopes and Leupold riflescopes, I was wondering which one of the Leupold series compares more closely to the Nikon. In other words, is the Monarch series closer to the VX-II or the VX-3 when considering how well the scopes are put together and the quality of glass used in them. I know that Nikon claims a light transmission rating of 95% for the Monarch, but I can't seem to come up with any claim as far as the Leupolds are concerned. I realize that Nikon may be taking this value out of context to try and show that their riflescopes are superior. I just was wondering where the Nikon seemed to fall now that Leupold has updated their line for 2009. I know that many people believe that the Leupolds are overpriced for what you get when comparing them to other scope brands. Thanks for all comments back. |
|
Randall45
Optics Apprentice Joined: June/25/2009 Status: Offline Points: 284 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The Nikon Monarch compares to a VX-III.The Leupold VX-II is a step below the Monarch line.The new VX3 may be compared with the Zeiss Conquest.I can't decide I have a 3 way tie with the VX3,Zeiss Conquest and the Sightron S2 Big Sky.The climate control is a very nice feature on the Big Sky series.The Nikon Monarch is a good value.I would stay away from the VX-II. I owned many of these scopes before I discovered scopes like the Sightron S2 and Nikon Monarch which are brighter clearer and cheaper then the VX-II.
|
|
Horsemany
Optics Journeyman Joined: February/28/2008 Location: Nebraska Status: Offline Points: 643 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
IMO the VXIII/VX3 is a superior product than the Monarch. I wish they'd have enhanced the optics on the Monarch line when they redesigned them and move production to the Phillipines.
|
|
SirSpeaksalot
Optics GrassHopper Joined: September/20/2009 Location: Alberta Canada Status: Offline Points: 2 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I am right now in the process of picking a scope for my 7mm WSM. I had it narrowed down to the buschnell 4200 Elite, or the Leupold VX-II. Soon after I had a look at the Nikon Monarch. After doing some research I think that I will be going with the Nikon. It looks fantastic, the price is slightly cheaper then the other 2 scopes at my local dealer, and most everything I have read on it is positive. I will let you know how it is after i purchase it and get it on the range (a week or 2 probly).
|
|
gferrett
Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/31/2009 Location: N. Idaho Status: Offline Points: 39 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi bbush;
When a guy is going to spend 300 to 600 on a rifle scope, one thing he should connsider is
can the scope be repaird.
Bushnell and leupold both have given me good service over the years.
Bad service: remington, burris and leica Good service SWFA and other.
|
|
FunShot
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/18/2008 Status: Offline Points: 91 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I prefer the elite over the monarch, i have both and i find that the monarch is more prone to sun glare than the elite when viewed at higher power, 12x and above. On low power though, the image on the nikon seems brighter than the elite, at least for my eyes. And the elite also has the Rainguard. Both are definitely a step above the vxII when it comes to image. |
|
danjojoUSMC
Optics Journeyman Joined: August/20/2009 Location: NE Ohio Status: Offline Points: 329 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Nikon Buckmasters (not Monarch) and Leupold VX-II are some of the scopes I've got to check out in the past few weeks in person. To me the Nikon Buckmasters scope seemed much better than the VX-II, Burris Fullfield 2 also just the same.
If I didn't know this name from that name, any scope company history, or hunters word of mouth stories I would look at someone strangely who payed the same money for a VX-II as a Buckmasters or Fullfield 2, let alone payed more for it.
Looking around the web you see a familiar thing that people recommend Leupold warranty, popular name, and the old Leupold scopes from the 70's and 80's that were great. The actual scope seems like an after-thought. You pay the money because Leupolds are known to be tough, known to have a super warranty, and because most everybody else does who has the money to spend.
Maybe their lens suppliers are sabotaging the company or something, I don't know.
|
|
fireroad
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/04/2009 Location: Idaho Status: Offline Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
IMHO, I have owned VX-II and VX-III's .... the Monarch is on par with the VX-III, not as sharp a reticle (maybe I looked through a dud) but brighter optics and a much better value. The VX-II is just plained over priced and optically inferior to a number of scopes out there.
Your eyes may vary!
|
|
oldguy
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/10/2009 Status: Offline Points: 86 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I purchased a 5-20x44 Monarch simply because of its clarity and I compared other scopes I purchase to it, for the money hard to beat.
|
|
TJ427
Optics GrassHopper Joined: September/27/2009 Status: Offline Points: 5 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The Monarch line does seem to be a great value with quality glass. Am tryig to find a 3-9x42 but still wondering about the sightron big sky line as they also hae a reputation for nice glass. It does seem that Leupold is overpriced although some say they have recently caught up.
|
|
fireroad
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/04/2009 Location: Idaho Status: Offline Points: 85 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You are correct, the Monarch is a great value. The Monarch X line looks really impressive, but have not looked through one. My Sightron Big Sky has been fantastic so far, very impressive (especially) when compared to the VX3 for the price. Leupold is going to have to upgrade more than just their coatings to catch up with Sightron, Zeiss, and Bushnell.
|
|
DAVE44
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/11/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 652 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Had a Sightron Big Sky and yes the optics were great and the view was fairly large and comfortable but the eye relief although long was very critical of eye position. It bothered me. Maybe mine was defective but I couldnt stand having to get my eye just right every time I brought the gun up to aim.
|
|
tjtjwdad
Optics Journeyman Joined: December/11/2007 Status: Offline Points: 365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Never compared a Sightron to a Zeiss to a Leupold VX-3. One thing one must consider when we read where scope (a) was compard to scope (b) is to remember whether or not if its a fair compairison. When I speak of comparing my Zeiss Conquest vs my Leupold VX-3, it a pretty staraight (as I can make it) comparision (4.5-14x50 vs 8.25-25x50). Its going to come down to personal choice, thats why I have one of each
On the other hand, if I were to compare my VX-3 (8.5-25x50) to my other Zeiss (4.5-14x50) the VX-3 wins that contest hands-down when the light is very dim, in fact, there is no comparison. In daylight, its a wash.
HTH,
Jim
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |