Nikon Vs. Leupold

[johnboy]

I know it's a ford vs. chevy type of debate, but since i dont have an opinion one way or the other yet, i figured i'd see what guys will say.

Several people have told me that Nikon makes great scopes and that if your not already partial to Leupold, there is no reason to spend the extra money.

I figure on spending around 200-400$ for a scope.
I think that will get me a mid range Leupold or a high end Nikon.

which one would you go for and why?

[SPURX2]

I am partial to nikon b/c you can get as good a scope for the money as you will find, they are a great "value", leupold is a great scope but not as good a value. Go for a monarch series if you are willing to spend that kind of money. 95% light transmisson, draws light very well

[C.L.Button]

I am a Leupold man 99%. I have one Burris 3-9x40 Fullfield II and it does a great job. For the price range you are looking at there are some great buys out there. Look around. I have two 3-9x40's (Vari X II's)but use mainly 3.5-10x50's (Vari X III's)and I have one 4.5-14x50 (Vari X III). They do an incredible job. I have no experience with Nikon due to the fact that I am older than dirt and they were the best when I was younger. Your rifle is only as good as the scope, don't shortcut yourself. Good Luck :D

[sirgiovanni]

Very happy with Nikon and their prices. Can't compare them for you, however, as I've never bought the Leupold.

[Elk Hunter]

I have a leupold on one of my rifles and a Nikon Buckmaster on another . Both are good scopes , but I have to go with the Leupold . It has always been good to me .

l

[cooper 21]

I have 7 Leupolds and 1 Nikon. Both have clear lenses, but I think Leupold holds more value for resale.

[Southpaw]

I have both brands and cant say anything bad about either.I think my Nikon monarch is clearer than my vari xIII but you be the judge and look at them both. I would stay away from the nikon pro staff as well as leupold rifleman they are not as clear and dont seem to give you the field of view they advertise.Good Luck.

[newshooter05]

i figure both scopes will serve u well. i do know the leupold has a life time warrenty and u don't need to be the original buyer. a used leupold at a fair price and sent back to have it gone over by the company makes a good deal.
david

[johnboy]

Hmm it's so hard to judge, everyone has a different opinion.. i was hoping a group consensious could sway me one way or the other..but it seems as it can still go either way, although i admit i am leaning twords the leupold.

lets talk about the optics..
is 3-9x40 going to be enough
or should i go with a 4-14x50?

I will be hunting under 250 yards most of the time, there are not many areas of my farm where i'll need to take more of a shot than that..
however, as played in to my decision of the caliber, i am planning to go out west and may be shooting longer ranges..

i would like to be able to shoot 3-400 yards, granted i only see a rare instance where i would hunt at that range, but i will still like to be able to shoot at those ranges.
I know it takes a lot of practice and i plan to put the bench time in..
but in that case is 3-9x40 enough? or if i go bigger is it going to be to much in say a 50 yard situation (i.e. the FOV not be enough)
i know the longer you go, the less FOV you have, correct?

until now i've had an older brush gun (marlin 30/30) and a crappy scope..
so this "big gun - long range" stuff is all new to me.

[C.L.Button]

I would go the 3.5-10x50 Vari X III. It will do all those distances and has incredible light gathering at dusk and dawn. Find one with the Boone & Crockett Duplex. It can be zero'd to your caliber and bullet wgt. The graduated scale has cross hairs out to over 500 yds. IF you look around you can find them in excellent used condition for 250 to 350. A 4.5-14X50 Vari X III used is gonna set you back 350 to 500. Are you near Louisville johnboy ? If so you are welcome to look at mine. Good luck.

[johnboy]

no, i'm closer to cincy.. but i apprechiate the offer..
I'll be headed to BPS this weekend to pick up the rifle, i'll give them a look there..
thanks for the advice.. I was looking at the LR reticle and i did like the B&C but i hadnt originally considered the VxIII due to cost.. but maybe they'll have them on sale or something..

[C.L.Button]

Maybe,, Good Luck in your quest. :D

[cephus]

no, i'm closer to cincy.. but i apprechiate the offer..
I'll be headed to BPS this weekend to pick up the rifle, i'll give them a look there..
thanks for the advice.. I was looking at the LR reticle and i did like the B&C but i hadnt originally considered the VxIII due to cost.. but maybe they'll have them on sale or something..


LEUPOLD.LEUPOLD.LEUPOLD. 3.5-10x40 with a duplex reticle. I guarantee you will not be disappointed. I have several, and have put them through some serious abuse...never a hitch.

[johnboy]

LEUPOLD.LEUPOLD.LEUPOLD. 3.5-10x40 with a duplex reticle. I guarantee you will not be disappointed. I have several, and have put them through some serious abuse...never a hitch.

i'm inclined to agree with you i think..
however i am leaning more twoards the newer LRD reticle..
I'd like one in silver.. but it seems if it's in the reticle and power i want, it's not in the color i want :(

[Fat Tony]

Leupold. Big fan here.

[mwezell]

Nikon is the best value in optics IMO. I used to be a Leupold fan,and still love them but I don't think they are better than the Nikon and they cost more. I have had nikon,swarovski,kahles and leupold scopes all side by side and the kahles was slightly best of the bunch.This was in good light and bad.The nikon was second. All of these scopes were their makers best stuff so made for a pretty fair assessment I think.I own and sell several Nikons and have never had the first problem but they also have a lifetime transferable warranty. The one person I know that said they had a problem with a nikon said that Nikon took care of it very fast for him. What more can you ask?-----Mike

[C.L.Button]

i'm inclined to agree with you i think..
however i am leaning more twoards the newer LRD reticle..
I'd like one in silver.. but it seems if it's in the reticle and power i want, it's not in the color i want :(

If you compare the light transfer between the 40 lens and the 50 lens you will suprised. The 50 is alot brighter. Check it out. ;)

[aceoky]

Leupold. Big fan here.

What he said :)

[gurn]

I own Leupold and Burris scopes on most of my guns. I can't say one bad thing about either one. It's good to know your keeping a good old boy from this country working when you buy a USA made scope.
As far as I know all the Leupold line, and all of the Burris line, except the FF2 are USA made.

[whitetailpredator]

Leupold. Big fan here.
I got to go with tony on this one!

[sweatbee]

Do yourself a favor and look at a Burris. They make a 4x14x42 and an excellent 3x9x40. I have both and love them. Go to the Burris website and there is a page that compairs burris to several other scopes.

[tex]

If all your shots are under 250 yds then get a fixed 6. Much wider field of view, I have a 3x9 Loopy and can't recall ever needing 9 power, even in Montana, or New Mexico. Plus a taller objective tends to change your ballistics from most printed charts. (Although some of the computerized ones now will let you put in the higher scope difference.) You can't go wrong with a 400 dollar scope of either brand, but get good mounts.

[buckfever]

If you compare the light transfer between the 40 lens and the 50 lens you will suprised. The 50 is alot brighter. Check it out. ;)

I agree wholeheartedly.

I've got a Leupold 3.5-10x50 Vari X III, a Nikon Monarch 3-9x50, and Nikon Monarch 2-7x40.

I don't know anything about the resale values, but have found that the Leupold and Monarch (50 mms) to be of very similar quality, clarity and brightness.

Both are signficantly brighter than the 40 mm (2x7) Monarch when set at the same power settings.

I don't really remember the price disparity between the two brands (assume Nikon is cheaper). If you are operating within a particular budget, I would definitely recommend buying a Monarch 50 mm before a Leupold 40 mm.

[daking]

A couple of things about optics:

1) Larger objective lenses always let in more light. Look at the guys who are photographing on the sidelines of games. They have those HUGE diameter lenses on their cameras. If light gathering is important and you can fit it on your rifle (and weight is not your primary consideration) go for the 50 mm objective lens.

2) Almost everyone makes an optically correct scope. The glass and coatings on the lenses has become pretty cheap. The machines that shape and polish the lenses are cnc and can do quickly and inexpensively what hands took years to learn and hours to craft. The laws of physics involved in bending the light to provide magnification is the same for every manufacturer. Making an optically correct scope is no big trick.

3) The big trick is making that optically correct scope rugged. You are asking what approximates a camera lens (less the aperture device) rugged enough to knock around on the top of a rifle. Further, you have the added mechanism of the crosshairs which must be suspended in a manner that allows for adjustment but holds them rock-solid after adjustment...even when you're banging through the woods. Lump on top of that the inhospitible environment in which you work. Think of how easily your glasses fog. If there is any path for moisture into the scope tube, your lenses fog in the same manner and when they do, you can't clean them with a hanky like you can your specs. Remember, there are at least four holes in that scope tube; one at the objective lens (and that lens is held in place by a threaded retainer), two holes for the crosshair adjustment and a hole for the ocular lens, that is held in place and adjusted by user operated threads. That's a lot of places for moisture to infiltrate. The precision fit of these portals is both critical and expensive. Then it gets smacked with a bunch of recoil (I think I recall about 25 lbs for a 30/06), that is trying to shake everything loose.

THEREFORE.....

The value of a high-dollar scope is its ability to take a licking and keep on ticking. To not fog. That's why you see the preponderance of mountain hunters using Leupold and Burris scopes. They do not fail under the extreme conditions. Nikon and Pentax (an oft overlooked brand) are optically very good. They are relatively new to the marketplace (15 years or so). They have not yet built up the long history of working correctly that the other two have. That's not to say that they are not good. They are. Still, if you're spending some real dough to go somewhere inhospitable to hunt, a few extra bucks on a known commodity is a smart investment.

I've got an old Bausch and Lomb Balvar. In its day, it was a high dollar item. The lenses are as clear as your urinary output after a case of beer, but I'd never want to count on it in a snowy nasty environment. When the chips are down, go for the Leupold or Burris. If your hunting were to be done on a clear, sunny 75 degree day, anybody's scope would suit you just fine. Unfortunately (with the exception of maybe groundhogs), hunting seasons tend to contain some crummy weather.

[johnboy]

I ended up going with the leupold 3.5-10x40 (duplex) in silver.
it fit perfect, i didnt have to buy new rings and i saved over $200

[johnboy]

LEUPOLD.LEUPOLD.LEUPOLD. 3.5-10x40 with a duplex reticle. I guarantee you will not be disappointed. I have several, and have put them through some serious abuse...never a hitch.

you were correct! :)

[ROCKMAN]

Listen,learn,then act. Daking has explained it as well as it could be explained.

[maxcam]

I am very happy with my Nikon purchases......I just put a Nikon on my smoke pole and love it.....

[A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER]

I just recently bought a nikon monarch ucc 6.5x20 AO. I brought it home & put it right beside my leupold vari x III 4.5x12. setting them both at the same power & looking at targets from 100 to 1500 yards the nikon was the CLEAR winner, showing much more detail at greater distances.

[C.L.Button]

I just recently bought a nikon monarch ucc 6.5x20 AO. I brought it home & put it right beside my leupold vari x III 4.5x12. setting them both at the same power & looking at targets from 100 to 1500 yards the nikon was the CLEAR winner, showing much more detail at greater distances.

You didn't list the size of the object lens's ? 40, 42, 50, or 56 mm ? Are they the same ?

[30WCF]

Many times I've had guys say, "Look at this for yourself, this scope is as clear as this one yodda yodda". When I look at them they dont have them adjusted properly, or the lenses are a different size. You'll notice all the cheaper scopes push the larger lenses.

I know for a fact because I've looked at all of them, Leupold is the best bang for the buck, you can get clearer scopes but your going to pay alot more.

Rifle scopes are one area where you still get what you pay for, the Leupold rifleman series might be the one exception.

[A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER]

You didn't list the size of the object lens's ? 40, 42, 50, or 56 mm ? Are they the same ?

the leupold is a 50mm, while the nikon is a 44mm objective.

[Ky Deer Slayer]

Leupold all the way. They are by far the best optics on the market. Excellent light transmission and clarity that is unbelievable. No other optics is touching my deer rifle.

[A.K.A. GROUSEGUNNER]

[quote=Ky Deer Slayer;404730]Leupold all the way. They are by far the best optics on the market.

That would be nightforce.

[RDL270]

Go out to www.chuckhawks.com (http://www.chuckhawks.com) and look at his post on optics. Pretty darn informative. He compares most major brand of scopes.

[Multidigits]

I really like Leupold scopes. They are good and about all I care to afford, but I'd have to say they aren't the best. Not when you look at the Swarovski or some of the other high imports.

[C.L.Button]

Go out to www.chuckhawks.com (http://www.chuckhawks.com) and look at his post on optics. Pretty darn informative. He compares most major brand of scopes.

Great site Roger. THANKS for the link. ;)

[john4]

I know I'm gonna rattle a few feathers with this, but in no way is Leupold the best bang for the buck. If your spending less than $400 on a scope, you are doing yourself a disservice by not looking at Burris, Nikon, and Sightron.

[Multidigits]

I've replaced one Nikon and one Burris that failed.....never replaced a Leupold yet.

[C.L.Button]

Me either Multi !!! I have dropped mine 20 ft out of a treestand onto a rock. It didn't even knock it out of zero. That's why I have 9 Leupolds ! I don't care what anybody says, I'll not buy anything but a Leupold ! ;)