Re: Nikon ProStaff scopes
- From: penultimate <drwilly@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:50:19 +0000 (UTC)
On Oct 12, 9:02 pm, UNCLEMO...@xxxxxxxxx (M.C. Williams) wrote:
...
In incremental response in consideration of the several posts since
mine.
1. Nikon is a quality optics company that in virtually all products
areas makes several product lines in optical quality tiers ranging
from an adequate, non-discriminating consumer level product to a top
line that in price and performance is usually competitive with the
best optics in the world. In rifle scopes, Nikon offers four (4)
lines. Prostaff is the least expensive line and is an "adequate"
consumer level product. Nikon does not put its name on useless junk
and I would expect a "Prostaff" to give good service. But the
"Monarch" line from Nikon is next to the top and is an optically far
superior product. "Glass" and coatings in a Monarch scope are of
approximately the same optical quality level as the Leupold VXIII
line. "Prostaff" is nowhere near as good. With the several Nikon
product lines you get pretty much exactly the optics you pay for. I
have three Nikon scopes (two Monarchs) and would agree that the
"glass" is good.
2. For big game hunting, however, I ,much prefer a Leupold and would
choose to carry a rifle equipped with an "inexpensive" Leupold or an
old Leupold (say 50 years) over one equipped with a brand new and
"expensive" Nikon every day of the week. The reason I come to
appreciate is DESIGN CHOICE that optimizes eye relief both for length
and quickness of target acquisition over optical viewing perfection.
What I am saying is that with a Leupold head postion is less critical
to a full field and clear view through the scope than with a Nikon.
If the purpose to your scope is targets or prairie dogs or just
looking, or your always have a lot of time to get a shot off, this
does not much matter. But to me on a hunting rifle it does. Which is
why my Leupold scopes are on the rifles I actually take hunting and my
Nikon scopes are on the rifles I take to the range. In theory, a deer
looks a little crisper through a Nikon --- if it hangs around long
enough for you to get your look.
3. The above, combined with being tough, is why about 8 of 10 scopes
you see miles from nowhere on the rifles of serious and experienced
hunters are Leupold. If wonder why Nikon scopes are not the same, ask
yourself how many Japanese you have ever seen hunting and how many
inexperienced scope buyers rely on anything other than what they can
see in the sporting goods store. Crisp image appearance is much
easier (and cheaper) to obtain in a design with limited eye relief.
Leupold started builing rifle scopes roughly 70 years ago because the
boss at the time was a serious hunter and scopes seemed a natural
extension to Leupold's surveying transits.
4. I mentioned the Burris Fullfield II because the new models combine
reasonably good glass with a more "Leupold-like" optimization of eye-
relief variables in the design. These are built in the Phillipines,
but in a brand new plant and under direct supervision of American
management.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Learn about rec.guns at http://www.recguns.net
Win a Fulton Armory AR-15 'game gun' and defend liberty at the
same time - Donate to MPFO today! Details at http://myguns.net
--------------------------------------------------------------
.
- References:
- Nikon ProStaff scopes
- From: M.C. Williams
- Nikon ProStaff scopes
- Prev by Date: Ringed the barrel on my S&W19-6!
- Next by Date: Re: Is fear of Obama getting elected influencing you to buy
- Previous by thread: Re: Nikon ProStaff scopes
- Next by thread: Inexpensive auto trap throwers
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
