optical quality Bushnell 3200, Nikon Monarch, Burris Fullfield, Leupol

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by superlite17, May 10, 2007.

  1. superlite17

    superlite17 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    97
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Which has the better optical quality Bushnell 3200, Nikon Buckmaster maybe Monarch, Burris Fullfield, Leupold VX II?

    Hello everyone, I followed a recomendation here and looked at the Mueller 8.5-25×50AO WOW! The pricing is great, they say full-multicoated, etc, etc... of course there are scopes at Harbour Freigh that say that also. Anyway, anybody use these?



    Thanks - Rod
     
  2. redbone

    redbone Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    688
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2005
    You need Zeiss on they list .
    They are the Best .
    Redbone
     

  3. MachV

    MachV Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,385
    Joined:
    May 31, 2001
    Mueller is one of them for the $$ scopes.I had a 4-14 that was better than a Simmons but not as good as a Leupold VXll and a VXll is below my expectations of a scope.
    Nikon Monarchs are good scopes and all I have looked through where in the VXlll class or better!!They say bushnell makes a good scope these days but I just cant get past the scopes of old and the elivation adjustment is almost always lacking.
     
  4. ol mike

    ol mike Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,161
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    Nikon monarch and leupold vxII are not in the same league as the others.
    I have a 3x9-50 leupold vxII that is a very bright scope better than a 5.5x16.5-44 nikon monarch.And i'd say the resolution is equal.

    I also have a swift premier 4.5x14-44 that i really like a lot.Very pleasant to use -your eye lines up in the scope easily no searching for a sight picture.
    I hear mueller is better than swift but -no- hands on expierence.
    For a low to midrange scope the nikon buckmaster w/ side focus is hard to beat , I have a 6x18 on a 22-250 and like it a lot.-Mike
     
  5. scrat600

    scrat600 Member

    Messages:
    5
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    I have a Nikon Monarch a Burris Signature Select and a VXIII that are almost identical in optical quality. Too bad the VXIII is about $200 more than the other two.
     
  6. Ahab

    Ahab Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    73
    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    [ QUOTE ]
    Nikon monarch and leupold vxII are not in the same league as the others.
    I have a 3x9-50 leupold vxII that is a very bright scope better than a 5.5x16.5-44 nikon monarch.And i'd say the resolution is equal.

    Your not comparing the same optical specifications thus your perception of brightness is invalid. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
     
  7. ol mike

    ol mike Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,161
    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    You're right Ahab -but just a general concesus on scopes i have.
    Like 8x against 8x ? which is better.