leica 1600b or Zeiss rangefinder

[bobcat trapper]

I am in the market for a new rangefinder. I have a Leupold rx1000i DNA model and its just not cutting in anymore i have a heck of a time getting it to pick anything up after about 550. I use it mostly of elk and coyote hunting. I would like a rangefinder i can reliably range a mountain side or a rock pile in a fiel out to 1000 yards or so. I have it down to either the new leica 1600b or a ziess does anyone have any experience with either?

 

[Broz]

Yes, I have tested both. Go Leica for the smaller more precise beam divergence. Plus I feel the 1600 Leica will out range the Zeiss in distance too. Hands down the Leica is my pick of these two.

Jeff

 

[royinidaho]

Yes, I have tested both. Go Leica for the smaller more precise beam divergence. Plus I feel the 1600 Leica will out range the Zeiss in distance too. Hands down the Leica is my pick of these two.

Jeff

Ditto.

 

[HuntnID]

x3. I have ranged several trees and hillsides and 1963 and 1923 with my Leica 1600B. I have had both and the Leica is smaller, quicker, and ranges further.

 

[goblbustr]

I am in the market for a new rangefinder. I have a Leupold rx1000i DNA model and its just not cutting in anymore i have a heck of a time getting it to pick anything up after about 550. I use it mostly of elk and coyote hunting. I would like a rangefinder i can reliably range a mountain side or a rock pile in a fiel out to 1000 yards or so. I have it down to either the new leica 1600b or a ziess does anyone have any experience with either?

I tried both and went for the Zeiss. What was said above is true you can range farther with the leica and it is a little faster however I thought the optics in the zeiss were better, it was much easier to steady freehand for more accurate ranging and it seemed to out perform the Leica in the rain. I don't know how durable the Leicas are but I can tell you I left my zeiss on the roof of my truck and only realized it when I made a right hand turn and my buddy seen seen them skidding across the north bound lane. I picked them up and have used them to this day with no issues aside from severe brush burn on the rubber coating. Just my 2 cents

 

[highridge1]

The zeiss holds much steadier,has better glass, and is more consistent. Good pick ! I have owned both and kept the zeiss

 

[IdahoRedneck]

I too went with the Zeiss.... If ida had more money I would have went Leica. That being said I have been very impressed with my Zeiss so far. Have ranged out to 8-900 yards or so on a overcast very cloudy day with a pretty heavy snow fall. Ive hit 1400 or so on sunny nice days which is all the range im ever gonna need. So I guess id say if ya have the money go Leica for the extra features but ya cant go wrong with a zeiss either...... Clear as mud

 

[FEENIX]

Another vote for the Leica. Mine (1600 CRF) stows neatly and readily on my shirt/vest pocket for easy access, a big plus esp. during bow hunting.

It's true that it's harder to get stable reading for LRs due to its size but you can get tripod adapter (Leica CRF Tripod Adapter for CRF Rangefinders 98750) for it.

 

[ltrbuck]

Hit 1892 with my Leica last week on about a 2' rock, furthest for me but very impressive nonetheless!

 

[royinidaho]

I bought a used Leica 1600 from a member in AZ.

Am plenty pleased.

During an evening in the mountains passed Howe ID repeatedly ranged to 1984 and not an inch further....

Today I did some google earthing to see if I could get a mile from my shooting spot in Wolverine canyon. GE indicated probable.

Good snow on top of the Ws. Maybe 6 - 8 inches.

Again regularly ranged to the upper 1900s and not an inch further.

Ranged to a perfect spot from another perfect shooting spot @ exactly 1760 yes and no more than 15 yards below the road. The spot was snow covered with some weeds and bushes. Was impressed.

The day the foliage was covered with heavy snow, couldn't range squat.

For practical hunting distances I am plenty satisfied w/the 1600. I now leave my binos 10X bins at in the truck for the most part.

 

[texas270]

I own both and feel there has been an accurate discussion. It comes down to what your priorities are. the Ziess is less expensive, has better glass, 8x vs 7x magnification, it is easier to hold stable and the "button release" method of ranging is better than the Leica "double punch" method.

despite all of those advantages for the Zeiss, I use the Leica 1600 since it's smaller beam divergence does a much better job of ranging whitetails past 480 yards.

thus for less than 480 yards, I'd reccomend the Zeiss; however, mine is simply not effective at ranging whitetails beyond 480 yards.

used to have a Swaro. to me, the Swaro is a virtual twin to the pros/cons of the Zeiss, just costs a lot more and its push button is difficult and disruptive to a steady hold.

 

[Northerner]

I have not used the Zeiss, but was totally impressed with the Leica. We got ranges off trees at just under 2000 yards. The true horizontal distance is easy to get and the size is great. It would easily range the middle of a grassy meadow at just under 800. Another guy in the group had a Nikon 1000 that would get the trees on the other side at about 825, but would not give a range anywhere in the meadow. Leica gave one anywhere you aimed it. I will be replacing my old Nikon with the 1600b soon.

 

[royinidaho]

Just returned from the mountains where I set up my 1 mile gong.

Tried to work it in between rain storms. What's with this 47* weather @ the end of Nov.

With a kind of rain mist the 1600 wouldn't range the mile as it did during clear sun light.

The longest I got was 700 yards.

Just another data point.

PS: too wet to shoot - darn!