anyone shooting w/ NIKON scopes?

[ben lurkin]

I've probably a dozen or so. Mostly the Monarch series, but a couple of their 3.5-14 and 4.5-18 Prostaff series as well. They are, IMHO, the best value for your money out there. Like above, they're comparable to the Leupold vari-x iii line. I'm pleasantly surprised by the Pro staff line for a walking varminter application. They suit my needs on that regard very well.

They aren't the best long-range scope as they don't have enough adjustment with the 1" tube. The newer 'black' line may be better in that application with it's 30mm tube but I don't have any experience with those - yet. I've a couple of NF BR scopes I use on my 1000 yard guns so the bar is set fairly high in that regard.

[WyoBull]

While I have always had Leupold scopes on my rifles, all of my camera gear and lenses are Nikon. Because of that, I do know their glass is top quality.

I actually looked through a Nikon Prostaff 4-12 a couple of days ago for a friend of mine looking to get a new scope for his daughter's .243. I was very impressed with the clarity of the scope. The store had it priced at $168 dollars and I told him he would be crazy not to pick it up at that price.

[Grey_Wolf]

I've got a handful of them, everything from a Prostaff 5 to a Monarch 5. I thought I could warm up to the BDC reticle that they have but just haven't been able to. The scopes are great but that is an annoyance that I can't can't seem to get past. The glass is good and clear, focus is good, don't generally twist knobs so can't say how well they track and reset. I will be switching them all out over time now. So I have some for sale.....

[foxhunter]

always had leupolds for 30 years but something happened to my eyes and I could not get the leupold to focus. switched to Nikon with the ocular focus and all is good to go. I use monarch and buckmacter and am very satisfied.
what scope are you looking at?

[Bayou City Boy]

Nikon does produce products with good glass.

For what its worth, my wife is a professional photographer with international acclaim, and she uses Nikon lenses exclusively............ She says that Canon would be her second choice in photo lenses. She also told me that camera lenses are like anything else involving glass; what one person sees may not be what another person sees. I will note that these lenses are not "Prostaff or even Monarch grade" lenses. Dropping Very Big $$'s for a specific lens to do some specific thing doe not even cause her to flinch..... Bless her heart......

I've owned a few Nikon scopes and could not get used to the clutter of the BDC reticle, in spite of the good image. The only Nikons that I currently own are a 4x16x40 SF Monarch on a Cooper MV 218 MB, and a much newer Prostaff 5 4.5x18x40 SF with a thin crosshair/dot reticle on a Ruger 77/17 17 WSM. Both have been very serviceable. Neither remind me of looking thru a tunnel. Older Buckmark scopes do, however, but I haven't considered one of them in years.

That said, I'm not planning on dumping any of my numerous Leupold scopes, which btw, all have ocular adjustment for picture and reticle clarity.....? And as ya'll know, many of those same scopes in higher powers also have parallax adjustment for specific range clarity.

-BCB

[coyotespotter]

I have a first gen Monarch 4-16x40. Held its zero for 5+ years I used it on my 22-250. Only 2 complaints, noticeable reduction of light transmission at the top(14 on up). 2nd eye relief changes a lot, need to set eye relief with scope on mid power setting. Rifle had an adjustable lop stock so I could change for the top end power setting.

[Screaminweasil]

If you like looking through a tunnel, you'll like the Nikon. Glass is fine, that's the best I can say.

Having owned older "pre-monarch" 3-9x40 and several "monarchs" made in Japan years back, i'm speaking from experience. One included a BDC 6.5-20 Monarch with Target Turrets. The large "Black Ring" around the image is annoying and well documented.

The BDC circle ret is about the most useless I've run across as well.

I'm surprised Nikon is still making scopes, they should stick to cameras


TO CLARIFY:
I haven't looked through/owned a Nikon scope in 7 years or so. So, the new ones are quite possibly, markedly different. But, I'm a Meopta guy, so i'll never know.

[rick w.]

I only have a pair of Nikon EFR 3x9 rimfire type scopes. Has a super tiny dot in the reticle. Bought them because of their 15yd focus for 22lr in an indoor range. The optics are fine, clear and bright to me.

The 3x9 power of the EFR scope is a little low for my desires after a good bit of trying them out. Still a nice scope but since have moved to the Burris 4.5x14 timberlines, same focus at 15yds, but 14x on the top end. Helps me out, the extra power. I now have four of the 4.5x14 timberlines by Burris, all on nicer 22lrs, very compact, not so good in low light, with the smallish front, but at the indoor range is quite adequate and then some. Tis built outside of the US, not high grade, but is pretty good for a 22lr type range scope I think.

The Nikon EFR's are a nice scope for the money, 120-ish, but the 9x keeps me off of them now. Neither scope above, the EFR or the Timberline; is an expensive scope, the timberlines are around 225, so plastic caps etc tend to be expected.

[GLWenzl]

I started out with Nikon and move to luepolds mostly for the VHR.

But that said now days I like even cheap glass “as long as it has a good fast easy adjustable ocular or diopter (don’t remember the nomenclature). Otherwise no one else can see a thing through my scope lol

[moorepower]

I love the EFR for .22's and have one on a little PCP carbine I have. I HATE the BDC circle crap! I looked through one and it was quite clear, but the rings are a no-sale for me.