Leica crf 1600 vs Leupold RX-1000 and other compact range finders

[squeeeeze]

I know it sounds like a stupid question initially. first off I have been reading posts and doing searches for hours and can't get my question anwered. There is no doubt that the Leica crf 1600 is a fine range finder and worth the money.

My question; is the Leica worth the extra $500 vs. the Leupold RX-1000, or the RX-1000 TBR for a little more than the non-TBR?

I am looking to range distances up to 1,000 yards but primarily in the 600-800 yards currently. Can't see that I'd even need to range anything over 1,000 yards unless it is for refernce only, not for shooting distances.

I am primarily a bowhunter and this will be my all around range finder. I will be rifle hunting some,probably a lot more as I get more into long range hunting. I have read other posts about the g7br2 range finder but I have no interest in something this size because it is way to bulky for how I carry and use my range finders. I wear them on my bino harness and need something pretty compact and light like the 2 I've mentioned.

Just would like some responses if I should spend the extra money on the Leica vs. less priced range finders. I was looking at going to get one today bacause theRX-1000's are on sale for 299.00.

Thanks for helping me make my decision

 

[SBruce]

I am looking to range distances up to 1,000 yards but primarily in the 600-800 yards currently. Can't see that I'd even need to range anything over 1,000 yards unless it is for refernce only, not for shooting distances.

What you intend on ranging at 1000 yds will determine if you need a 1000yd model or a 1600yd model. In my experiences, no laser rangefinder will range a game animal at the fully advertised distance. Example; my 1600 will only give reliable readings on deer out to about 1000yds. My older 1200 would only do it to about 800 yds. An even older 800 would only range deer to about 500yds.

If you're talking about ranging hillsides, big rocks, cutbanks, trees, buildings and street signs or reflective things, then yes; they will go the fully advertised distances, and sometimes even further.

Black or round objects are tough to get reliable ranges on, as are small targets and flat level ground.

I am primarily a bowhunter and this will be my all around range finder. I will be rifle hunting some.

Based on that statement, I would say the RX1000 model would be fine. Especially is price is a concern.

 

[squeeeeze]

What you intend on ranging at 1000 yds will determine if you need a 1000yd model or a 1600yd model. In my experiences, no laser rangefinder will range a game animal at the fully advertised distance. Example; my 1600 will only give reliable readings on deer out to about 1000yds. My older 1200 would only do it to about 800 yds. An even older 800 would only range deer to about 500yds.

If you're talking about ranging hillsides, big rocks, cutbanks, trees, buildings and street signs or reflective things, then yes; they will go the fully advertised distances, and sometimes even further.

Black or round objects are tough to get reliable ranges on, as are small targets and flat level ground.



Based on that statement, I would say the RX1000 model would be fine. Especially is price is a concern.

That's true Bruce about advertised yardage. I currently have a Nikon Pro 800 and had trouble getting consistant readings even out to 500 and 600 yards on my Coue's hunt in 2010. I'm not talking on the animal, more like large boulders and hill sides. Up to 350 and 400 it worked well.

I have read some of your posts about your 1600 CRF and you seem to really like it. Do you find the angle compensator and other features to work well? Any problems with them? Does the angle compensator work well say for archery at 75 yards and less? Equally for longer ranges rifle hunting? I guess I'm trying to justify the Leica but won't if I really don't need it. I guess if I needed 800 or 1000 yards I may have trouble with the RX-1000? Cabelas had the RX-1000 with the TBR for $375.00, of course that sounds much better than $799.00 but you get what you pay for.

 

[SBruce]

The angle feature seems to work good, but it doesn't compensate or change the distance because of the angle. It simply tells you the angle (relative to horizontal) to the intended target. So it does about the same thing as an angle indicator mounted on a riflescope or bow.

The ballistic drop feature is designed for rifles, and assumes a 100 or 200 yd zero. It is designed to work out to about 500 yds. It will tell you how many minutes to dial or hold based on the distance you just ranged and the pre-determined ballistic curve you've picked out. It won't give a solution much beyond 500 yds.

I usually have the drops/drifts to 500 memorized for whatever rifle I am shooting at the time, so I don't find this feature very useful personally. I just leave it turned off.

The main reason I bought the 1600 was because my 1200 would only go about 700 yds max on antelope and 800 yds on deer. I wanted the ability to range game a little further, and prarie dogs at least to 600. So far the 1600 seems to do what I bought it for.

I've actually had two of the 1600's, first one didn't work right and I sent it back, but Leica was very good about getting me a brand new replacement within a couple of weeks.

 

[highridge1]

I have had no luck with leupold rangefinders I won't buy another. Yes the Leica,swarovski,Ziss rangefinders are worth the money. The Zeiss PRF is outstanding for the price. The Leica 1600 is excellent too and very compact. With these 2 I can hit anything at 1000 yards.I was ranging horses with both these models at around 1,100 yards and getting results every try.Furthest I have ranged with them is about 1490 yards with the zeiss and 1750 yards with the Leica.The Zeiss is easier to hold steady and seems quicker,awesome glass too.

 

[squeeeeze]

The angle feature seems to work good, but it doesn't compensate or change the distance because of the angle. It simply tells you the angle (relative to horizontal) to the intended target. So it does about the same thing as an angle indicator mounted on a riflescope or bow.

The ballistic drop feature is designed for rifles, and assumes a 100 or 200 yd zero. It is designed to work out to about 500 yds. It will tell you how many minutes to dial or hold based on the distance you just ranged and the pre-determined ballistic curve you've picked out. It won't give a solution much beyond 500 yds.

I usually have the drops/drifts to 500 memorized for whatever rifle I am shooting at the time, so I don't find this feature very useful personally. I just leave it turned off.

The main reason I bought the 1600 was because my 1200 would only go about 700 yds max on antelope and 800 yds on deer. I wanted the ability to range game a little further, and prarie dogs at least to 600. So far the 1600 seems to do what I bought it for.

I've actually had two of the 1600's, first one didn't work right and I sent it back, but Leica was very good about getting me a brand new replacement within a couple of weeks.

Alright, it sounds like my main decision here is just how far I actually will need the max range. Probably 800, but possibly out to 1,000. I guess the smaller the target the better range on the range finder max needs to be as in your animal size examples.

Compensates only to 500 yards huh? Doesn't seem like that would really help me. Easy enough to remember Ballistics out to 500. 600 and up is where you'd need it and bullets really start dropping. I'll be getting BC turrets soon and tapes ran so I guess it wouldn't matter either way anyway.

The Leupold shows compensated yardages for both archery and rifle. I've missed deer due to miscompensated yardages due to inclines and declines (mostly declines) with my bow.

Thank you for your help!

 

[270 lefty]

For what you want a few hundred more than the leupold you could get a lieca 1200 doesnt have all the bells & whistles the 1600 has, but I saw them in the high $500.00 @ cabelas sure you can get them better @ optics planet or some of the sponsers on longrange hunter.
I have a nikon 800 works real good like was said earlier uot to 400 for antalope got 590 on a buck once 780 on a rock cliff fave . That as far as ive gone with it I to am in the market for a little more range. the $3500.00 gun I had built isn't justified with out more distance in my rangefinder.

 

[SBruce]

You're welcome.

Yea, angled shots with a bow are a totally different game than with a rifle.

30-45 degree shots are pretty common with tree-stand bow hunting. Those same angles are kinda rare with rifles. The angles don't matter much with a rifle until the angle gets over 15 degrees and the shot gets further than 300 yds. A 40 or 45 degree shot at 300yds with most rifles only requires a few inches of adjustment. Enough to miss a rock chuck, but still in the vitals area on deer. Of course when the distance gets beyond 300 things start to change quickly.

One of the coolest things I saw back when I bowhunted was a pendulum type of sight. The sight actually was on a pivot of some sort, and was supposed to automatically change and compensate for the angle.?? I don't know how accurately they worked or if they are even still around, I haven't bowhunted for over 20 years.

 

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

I have a brand new in the box 1600 scan and it will range a dirt spot in the middle of a corn field at 1602yards. I had a 1200 scan before and I was lucky to get over 800 yards on a car.

 

[cross]

Leupold should be ashamed of their rangefinders. Optics of a door peephole and waaaayyy too confusing. I'd buy a Bushnell Elite 1500 before a Leupold.

 

[AlaskaIsGodsCountry]

I have had no luck with leupold rangefinders I won't buy another. Yes the Leica,swarovski,Ziss rangefinders are worth the money. The Zeiss PRF is outstanding for the price. The Leica 1600 is excellent too and very compact. With these 2 I can hit anything at 1000 yards.I was ranging horses with both these models at around 1,100 yards and getting results every try.Furthest I have ranged with them is about 1490 yards with the zeiss and 1750 yards with the Leica.The Zeiss is easier to hold steady and seems quicker,awesome glass too.

+1 on the Leupold range finders and the CRF 1600. I would go with the CRF 1600 hands down and don't look back. I am very happy with mine. I will probably use my Leupold as a target for revenge or hope somebody will steal it as long as they don't throw it back through my window.

 

[sp6x6]

I have dozens of Leupold optics. And my hunting buddy has the Leica and Leupold, and the Leo is far inferior. I have the leica 900-1200 and they blow the leupy away. The Leia 1600 is the most bang for your buck, we range to 1800 with it regular on trees and stuff.

 

[AlaskaIsGodsCountry]

I have dozens of Leupold optics. And my hunting buddy has the Leica and Leupold, and the Leo is far inferior. I have the leica 900-1200 and they blow the leupy away. The Leia 1600 is the most bang for your buck, we range to 1800 with it regular on trees and stuff.

I used to be a Leupold man and the good majority of my long guns still have Leupolds VX-III's on them. They make a good rifle scope and for a long time, they were the only ones to consider. But now, I think there are better options out there at the same price points and my financial situation has changed so I now can afford S&B and Zeiss Victory levels for scope glass. Although I did put a VX7 on my new 375H&H and I am just amazed at the brightness/clarity of that scope. Leupold just doesn't make a range finder that is up to par and not their strongsuit.

 

[Nieko]

Dont waste your money! Get the leica 1600, you will love it. You will end up buying it later if you get something else. I've had many and liked the leica 1200 and 1600 the best.