Bman…
I could care less about the range a laser can range a tree or house – it means absolutely nothing (unless you are a military shooter).
Trees and houses are pure BS, because, to a laser range finder, they are not dark green, they are bright white.
(This is what your laser sees...)
The real test and challenge for a laser rangefinder is not to "ping" a house or a 40 foot tall maple, it is to ping a target that a is very small, and dark, like pile of wet dirt, or a black bear… in bright sunlight – and under those conditions, most lasers fail miserably.
I have been a range finding junky since forever. I shoot woodchucks, crows, and some years ago, prairie dogs.
My first rangefinder was a "Ranging 1000", a poor quality split image rangefinder that was good to 150/200-ish yds – that was in 1975. I actually threw it in the garbage, 'cuz with the cartridges I was using, 200 yds was "Point Blank" and needed no scope adjustment.
My next was a Bushnell 400, the first consumer grade laser rangefinder. I don't remember when that was – maybe 1985-ish?? It was (and is) good for 300-350 yds. I still have it and it works perfectly. Then I added a Bushnell 1000 (good for 700-ish yds), and still have that one too.
But then I got serious about range finding, and acquired the following:
An AN/GVS-5 which is good for 10,000 meters under the worst conditions.
And a Swedish NIFE A-40-P (a.k.a. The Swedish Periscope)… maximum range 10,000 meters, effective against PDs and woodchucks, 1,500 meters.
And a WILD, 80cm rangefinder. Maximum range is 20,000 meters, effective against woodchucks and PDs, 1,800 to 2,000 meters.
So, it should be obvious that I am serious about rangefinders, and I know what I am talking about.
I find your comments to be disingenuous. You speak more as a shill for Nikon, than someone that is here giving honest answers to honest questions.
You say:
"6. I asked a question about how their models competed with the sig kilo 2k.
The MONARCH 3000 Stabilized is head and shoulders above the Kilo. I usually don't comment on things like this but it is entirely ture [sic]. The laser's used in the Nikon's are also much safer."
HEAD and SHOULDERS? Really!
Sorry, but they may be competitive, but they are NOT head and shoulders over the Sig, Leica, and others in the under $1,000 range, and here's why.
The Leicas allow you to put in your own ballistic data on a SD card, so if you use odd bullets, no problem… the Nikon - Nada, nothing – this is "Head and Shoulders BEHIND the crowd… it is dark ages technology.
"Class 3R visible-light lasers are considered safe for unintentional eye exposure, because a person will normally turn away or blink to avoid the bright light. Do NOT deliberately look into or stare into the beam -- this can cause injury to the retina in the back of the eye.
Be aware of beam reflections off glass and shiny surfaces. Depending on the surface, the reflected beam could be about as strong and as focused as a direct beam.
The Nominal Ocular Hazard Distance (NOHD) for the most powerful Class 3R visible-beam laser (4.99 mW) with a tight beam (0.5 milliradian divergence) is 104 ft (32 m).
Color indicates the relative hazard: Red = potential injury, green = unlikely injury. Beyond the Nominal Ocular Hazard Distance, the chance of injury is "vanishingly small" according to safety experts.
For a 4.99 mW Class 3R laser with a less-tight beam that spreads out faster (1 milliradian), the NOHD is 52 feet (16 m). This divergence is more typical of consumer lasers.
If you are closer than the NOHD distance to the laser, there is a possibility of retinal damage if the direct or reflected beam enters your eye longer than about ¼ second. The closer you are to the laser and the longer the beam is in the eye, the greater the chance of injury."
Almost none of the above is relevant because it is about VISIBLE lasers – range finders use longer wave length invisible beams.
The one part that IS relevant is, that Nikon uses much larger beam divergences – and that is in the WRONG direction from what we want. The larger the beaam divergence is, the more false reflections you get when going after smallish targets.
Leicas use divergences of 1.5x0.75 mrads. Which are equal to ~5"x3" at 100 yds, and
Nikon beam divergences are HUGE, as shown here with the 1000 and 1200 yard lasers.
So, Bman, you should stop using this forum as a sales tool, and making erroneous and blatantly wrong statements and claims – it taints the forum.