New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - What should I be looking for?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

What should I be looking for?

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/12/2011 at 13:04
slowr1der View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: March/25/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 247
I'm not sure if it's my eyes, or what the deal is, but I have had a Nikon Prostaff for a while now that I bought more or less just to try out and see if what I'd read was true and see how it worked for me. The scope seemed well made and very durable, but the turrets left a lot to be desired and the glass while decent left some to be desired. The biggest issue I had with the glass was when shooting in the snow while the sun was out I got a lot of chronic abrasion which looked like blue flare coming off of the snow. I've not had as big of a problem with this when it's not snow on the ground, or a white or light colored backstop.

So anyway, I bought a Nikon Monarch UCC 3-9x40 after reading a ton about them and how they were vastly superior to the Prostaff in every way. I got a good enough deal I couldn't pass it up. So the last day I've been testing them side by side looking for differences in the glass quality. Now, I don't have anywhere to test them that's over 100 yards at this time, but in the tests I've done in that range, I just can't see much difference. Now, I will also say since it's 90 degrees out we don't have snow so I'm not sure if the chronic abrasion will be a problem in the Monarch or not, but looking at everything else in the daytime I couldn't tell a difference at all between the two. So last night I went out expecting to see a huge difference in low light situations as that's one of the area's I felt the Prostaff was slightly lacking compared to the Burris FFII I've got. To my surprise in the low light I couldn't really tell much if any of a difference either. I tried it in various lighting conditions at as close as 20 yards to almost 100 yards and still just couldn't much difference at all.

Now, I do think the turrets on the Monarch are a huge and I mean huge improvement over the Prostaff. They are finger adjustable with very positive clicks. This was a very nice improvement. However, the glass just wasn't what I expected.

So I'm just wondering at this point if there is some difference I should be looking for, or if the glass in the Monarch isn't that much better than the Prostaff, or if my eyes just suck since I can't tell a big difference. Honestly, I've tried lots of scopes in the $300 and under range, and the Burris FFII has been the best for me, but there hasn't been a huge difference between most of them. I've also tried several scopes in the under $100 range that have had just as good of glass as several in the $300 range. Now, I've tried out a few like like a Bushnell Banner that obviously are lacking in glass quality compared to several more expensive scopes, and another cheap Bushnell that wasn't that great, as well as once cheap Tasco that looked washed out, but I've also tried a Simmons and a couple of other Tasco's that are right there along side the Prostaff glass imo.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/12/2011 at 13:15
308 Sav View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: July/18/2010
Location: Kentucky
Status: Offline
Points: 362
Glass quality is very subjective. I would say you have stated what I have believed to be true for years. You have to step up a lot in price to notice a big difference in glass. Now I do believe that better glass shows itself more at higher magnifications and longer distances. But to me at hunting distances and power the difference is less noticeable. Find what works for you and do not worry if x is better glass than y. I do believe the features like turrets and repeatable performance  is more important than glass quality when it comes to my choices in scopes. Does it do what you need it to do, is the glass good enough for your application? Those are what matters. If your eyes can't tell the difference than what does it matter if one is actually better than the other.

Edited by 308 Sav - June/12/2011 at 13:16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/13/2011 at 10:12
Poodleshooter1 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: August/15/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 116
Try this: get a good target, and then move the target to the edge of the glass. You may find that the image quality degrades on the Prostaff, but not on the Monarch UCC.

Practically speaking though, I'd rather have a scope that had fuzzy, washed out glass, but a perfectly adjusting set of turrets, than the best glass in the world that didn't adjust consistently or hold zero.
Glass clarity is really only important to me at very extended ranges on tiny targets. I'm most interested in consistent adjustments and ability to hold zero.

On a big game scope for use under 300yds, glass quality is nice, but not critical.


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/13/2011 at 10:37
Urimaginaryfrnd View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Resident Redneck

Joined: June/20/2005
Location: Iowa
Status: Offline
Points: 13877
Try this - buy what works for you. If you are happy with a $30 tasco that's ok. If you think you will see a lot of difference between that and some of the other scopes you might or you might not depending on your eyes and the light conditions.  Now to my eyes I can tell a difference between a Tasco World Class and a Bushnell 4200 or a Zeiss Conquest and to me there is a lot of difference and I believe that the difference I see is worth value to me but it may not be the same for you. I would rather have tough reliable scopes than optically perfect glass but I do enjoy good glass.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/14/2011 at 23:01
slowr1der View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: March/25/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 247
I've been playing with this scope quite a bit more and I still don't see much of a difference glass wise. However, the rest of the scope seems to be superior. I'm really liking the turrets on it, but I haven't gotten to shoot the rifle yet, so I can't say for certain how they track and if they are repeatable. Overall, I'm thinking this scope is worth the extra I paid for it over a Prostaff, but glass wise I don't see much if any of a difference. It's other features that I see the difference in.


As for the $30 Tasco, I have one and it works and has pretty decent glass. Honestly, I can't tell a huge difference between it and this either glass wise. This one might be better, but there isn't a huge difference. Either will get you well past legal hunting hours. That being said, while I've never had an issue with the Tasco I have and I don't have a reason to change it, I don't know that I'd trust many of them, and I certainly wouldn't put one on my main hunting rifle. I've also noticed that a friend has a very similar Tasco and the glass quality between that Tasco and mine is huge. That one while clear enough to hunt with, is almost washed out looking, and not bright at all in low light. It's a huge difference between that one and the Monarch or even the Prostaff. I'm not sure if I just got an exceptional one, or if that one is just a crappy one. So I really do believe in buying quality optics, mostly for the warranty, perceived durability and the repeatable tracking, but nice glass is always a positive too. I say perceived durability because I've not had any issues with the cheaper scopes and the large majority of my hunting buddies that use them haven't had any either, but I feel more comfortable and place more trust in a decent optic.

I'm just starting to think once you hit a certain price range in glass quality, you start paying more and getting very very small improvements. It may just be the ones I've tried though who knows. There are also always exceptions to that too like the Leupold VX-I's and similar. Honestly, my $30 Tasco has better glass than the VX-I's I've had. However, it seems like once you step up to something decent like the Burris FFII, or even the Prostaff that while not as good as the FFII is decent, it seems like you have to pay a ton more to get something better glass wise. I could be totally wrong here, and I may not know what to look for and that may be why it seems this way. Now with other features like turrets and reliable tracking, you definitely get a lot better when you pay more, but as far as pure glass quality I'm not sure that you necessarily do.


Edited by slowr1der - June/14/2011 at 23:09
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/14/2011 at 23:23
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 3380
I wouldn't expect a glaring difference in a Prostaff to Monarch image comparison.  Maybe in a few certain areas, like chromatic aberration (CA) control.  I will say that when I first really got into optics, I had a harder time seeing the differences, but as I got more and more into it, and spent more and more time comparing, I started to notice the difference more easily.  Now I can tell the difference between scopes pretty quickly, and unfortunately, I notice CA immediately.

A lot of times, I have found the non-optical features of more-expensive scopes are worth it, as you noted.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/15/2011 at 05:33
Vermin93 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: June/22/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 104
I've only been following this board for a short while, but during that time I think I can count on one hand the number of times the experienced guys here have recommended a Nikon Monarch to someone looking for a scope. Just my observation.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/15/2011 at 07:21
SVT_Tactical View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
Chief Sackscratch

Joined: December/17/2009
Location: NorthCackalacky
Status: Offline
Points: 28756
Originally posted by Vermin93 Vermin93 wrote:

I've only been following this board for a short while, but during that time I think I can count on one hand the number of times the experienced guys here have recommended a Nikon Monarch to someone looking for a scope. Just my observation.
really? Go look at cheaptricks post, he like nikon. lol  Just kidding
 
Anyway history showed that Nikons CS sucked therefore they didnt' get recommended, now they are picking it up so more and more times they will coem into play.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/15/2011 at 10:01
Midwest_Hunter View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: January/07/2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 102
I once recieved a monarch as a gift and was very pleased with it. Held up on my .300wsm pretty well.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: June/15/2011 at 15:43
lucytuma View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: November/25/2007
Location: Wisconsin
Status: Offline
Points: 5389
Originally posted by Vermin93 Vermin93 wrote:

I've only been following this board for a short while, but during that time I think I can count on one hand the number of times the experienced guys here have recommended a Nikon Monarch to someone looking for a scope. Just my observation.
 
Just a few years ago the nikon monarch was highly recommended and it still is a very nice scope.  The problem with the monarch is that alot of the competition has caught up too or surpassed it for the same price.  I believe we'll see an upgraded monarch in the near future, once this economy turns around.


Edited by lucytuma - June/15/2011 at 15:45
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "What should I be looking for?"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Looking for a couple new hunting scopes atlasman Rifle Scopes 17
Looking for suggestions... NoahbodyImportant Rifle Scopes 9
Looking for a 20X fixed power scope airborngrunt Rifle Scopes 5
Looking for a cleaning kit DanteRod Tripods, sun shades, lens covers, etc. 1
Looking for my first spotter Dann Spotting Scopes 2 12/1/2004 3:47:55 PM
Looking for info on Bushnell Scope tpoliti Rifle Scopes 4 10/26/2004 5:49:43 PM
FNG is looking for guidance trobert Tactical Scopes 11 12/6/2004 7:30:26 PM
looking @ a fullfield II burris 1.75X5? trapmonkey Rifle Scopes 5 1/9/2005 3:35:54 PM
Looking for 20X plus scope in silver nuketrainer Target 5 4/9/2005 4:17:37 PM
Looking for a new varmint scope 66gt350 Varmint Scopes 13 10/8/2005 1:58:15 PM


This page was generated in 0.340 seconds.