Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Nikon Monarch 4-16x50 |
Post Reply |
Author | |
WVHILLBILLYJLM
Optics GrassHopper Joined: November/24/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: November/09/2011 at 08:52 |
I currently have a Nikon Buckmaster 4-12x50 and I am looking to upgrade. The question that I have is if the Monarch has the same tunnel effect as what the Buckmaster does?
Thanks!!
|
|
oldguy
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/10/2009 Status: Offline Points: 86 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I sold my last Nikon Monarch and purchased a Mueller, I was disappointed with the monarch in terms of clarity of glass. I returned the scope to Nikon to have it check they claimed it met all specs.
The Mueller on the other hand was super clear edge to edge, did I simply get a poor one of the lot, possible,but doubt I will purchase another.
|
|
WVHILLBILLYJLM
Optics GrassHopper Joined: November/24/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Did you have the 4-16x50 and did it have the tunnel effect when you looked thru it?
|
|
oldguy
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/10/2009 Status: Offline Points: 86 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I had a 5-20x44, the adjustments overall build quality was good except the glass, I considered it
a tunnel vision effect low to high setting it did not appear(to me)clear edge to edge,and while it
function as a target scope it simply was not "pleasant" to use during a long session at the range,
I paid nearly $500 so was badly disappointed with clarity especially considering a $229 Mueller
was better.
|
|
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
^I found that to be true too with nikon scopes in general the glass lacked clarity and I looked though several different scopes at several different stores. So, I went with leupold scopes(vx-3's mark ar's) because of their light weight clear glass among several other reasons list elsewhere on this forum.
|
|
Poodleshooter1
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/15/2010 Status: Offline Points: 116 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
No, it doesn't have it nearly as badly.
The Buckmaster series seems pretty unique in having that bad tunnel effect. (I have a 4.5-14x Buckmaster). Monarchs have their own issues... Edited by Poodleshooter1 - November/10/2011 at 16:42 |
|
ArtP
Optics GrassHopper Joined: September/04/2011 Status: Offline Points: 26 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I bought and sold a Monarch 4-16x42 and was disappointed with the glass -- lacked contrast and clarity. I also found it to have a very small sweet spot regarding eye position, meaning the image would blink out with the slightest head movement (more sensitive than other scopes with similar specs).
It tracked nicely and had nice controls and feel, I just couldn't get over the glass. For the money it was the most disappointing scope I have bought; I know that is harsh, but it's how I feel. |
|
oldguy
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/10/2009 Status: Offline Points: 86 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
Oldtrader3
Optics Journeyman Joined: May/16/2009 Location: WA (state) Status: Offline Points: 445 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
My issue with the Monarch was clarity and contrast as well. I sold my Monarch at a loss.
|
|
CDR3
|
|
WVHILLBILLYJLM
Optics GrassHopper Joined: November/24/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 13 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks for the input. I believe I will take a look at a Weaver Super Slam 3-15x50 or a Leupold 3.5-10x50 CDS. What are your thoughts on these?
|
|
ArtP
Optics GrassHopper Joined: September/04/2011 Status: Offline Points: 26 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I hate to report to you that the Weaver doesn't get high marks either. I've not looked recently, just what I've read.
You might find advice you're looking for by stating a budget. If you're in the $100-$200 range, I saw some Burris FFII's, illuminated, for under $200 recently. |
|
ArtP
Optics GrassHopper Joined: September/04/2011 Status: Offline Points: 26 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I don't have enough posts to edit. I want to say, I made a mistake by suggesting the SuperSlam is in the $1 -$2 hundred range. Sorry. I know it's more expensive, but none the less, not among the most scope for your money.
|
|
300 ultramag
Optics Apprentice Joined: December/05/2009 Status: Offline Points: 171 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
nitrex tr2 is a good scope
|
|
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I had a Monarch, 4-16x42mm and thought it to be a pretty good scope. Glass was the old Monarch glass that I always liked. BDC reticle worked as I thought it would, but unlike others, I liked it overall.
The only gripe I had was that I didn't like the side focus much. It worked fine, but I prefer a rear focus or AO to correct parallax, because I'm a lefty. I did a write up on it and it's in the Members Review Forum. Not sure what ya'll didn't like about yours, but I respect everyone's opinion here. If ya don't like it, ya don't like it. My pick on that Monarch line has always been, the 2.5-10x. And the lower magnification models, are pretty good, of what I've seen. Edited by cheaptrick - November/13/2011 at 12:36 |
|
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.
|
|
oldguy
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/10/2009 Status: Offline Points: 86 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
quote(
I did a write up on it and it's in the Members Review Forum. Not sure what ya'll didn't like about yours, but I respect everyone's opinion here. If ya don't like it, ya don't like it. )quote
I agree with the above, while I did not like my Nikon Monarch others may or simply I received a bad example which is not unusual in today's poor quality control market. With scopes in the world market and changing suppliers what you buy this month may not be the same next month all we can do is look for a good warranty and hope for the best.
|
|
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
My Monarch was even an evil..."made in the PI" model.
I always recommend a Conquest over a Monarch. I think the "Connie" is a better optic than the Monarch, hands down. There's nothing about the Monarch, that the Zeiss doesn't do better, IMO, and I've had both. Would those here take a VX3 over a similar Monarch? |
|
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.
|
|
rustic
Optics Master Joined: September/30/2011 Status: Offline Points: 1461 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have looked though all kinds of scopes lately, several Monarchs and was disapointed and with nikons in general. For the money vx3s are as clear as any that I have looked though and much clearer than any nikon I have looked though. With leupold vx3s you get is a true hunting scope(light,tough,simple) with the reputation, C/S, and warranty plus the better resale value of just about any other brand of optics... if so needed.
|
|
slowr1der
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/25/2010 Status: Offline Points: 247 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I've got two Monarchs and I like the scopes, but the glass quality isn't their strong spot. Honestly, I couldn't tell much if any of a difference between the glass in them and the couple year old Prostaff I had. They both had quite a bit chromatic aberration for me, and they both had slight distortion around the edges.
That being said, the glass wasn't horrible it just wasn't great either. The BDC is also not my favorite reticle, but it's decent. I really liked the rest of the scope, and I still have the Monarchs. I've since sold the Prostaff. I do however like the Burris FFII's a lot better for a lot less money though. The glass in my FFII's blow the Monarch away, as does the reticle. IMO the next step up from a FFII in a scope like this is the Zeiss Conquest, and it's not a huge step up. I'd look at those two depending on what you want to spend. I've actually thought about selling my Monarchs and trying something else, but I haven't yet. |
|
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I prefer the eye relief on the Monarch, a fixed 4", better than I liked a variable of the VX3. The VX3 is a good scope too though, none the less. I liked the Leupold AO over the Nikon side focus too.
The Monarch has a BIG ass ocular housing and some have complained that it interferes with their rifles bolt lift. CZ's come to mind.
VX3 on my Remington. Here's the 4-16x Monarch on my Bravo Middy. |
|
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.
|
|
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 |