SmallCaliberCentral

Opinions are appreciated.... on New Model (NK8428) "Nikon Monarch" 6-24x50SF scope tube dia. 1" and 1/8 MOA w/sunshade. Fine crosshair w/dot.
Looking for input, good or bad as I also own several 30mm Leupolds in the 4.5x14 50mm (M1) (MarK4) and a 8.5x25x50LRT w/vhp reticle but am looking for a good scope for another rifle that I dont have to spend another $1,000+ to get results. It will be used on a Winchester 1885 single shot .22-250 w/28" barrel for walk-about (bi-pod) shooting of ground hogs and maybe prairie-dogs. Thanks

Here is a article I posted yesterday on another sight. Thar discussion was regarding the Zeiss vs Leupold VX-3. When I replied I just included the results of my Nikon Monarch 6.5-20x44 with target dot reticle.

In a nutshell, as far as clarity and resolution the one I have is pretty good when compared to the others even though it has a smaller objective. Regarding customer service, I just sent that same scope off for a repair to Nikon so I'll hold comment until I hear from them.

To me, Burris is also good but wher Leupold shines above Nikon and Burris and just about everyone else is reticle selection and the option to swap them out along with their customer service reputation.

JMHO,

[i]I'll try and help but there are differences between the scopes features;
a. Zeiss Conquest, Z-Plex, 4.5-14x50, 1" Tube.
b. Leupold VX-3, Thin Duplex, 8.5-25x50, 30mm Tube
c. Nikon Monarch, Thin Cross Hair with Target Dot, 6.5-20x44, 1" tube.

Low Light: I looked into a dark wooded area approximently 100 yards away. It was back in March around 9:00PM. IMO, the Zeiss had better clarity (sharpness). It also had better light gathering capability but only by a very slight margin. The Leupold had warmer colors, whereas the Zeiss's colors tended to be cooler. The Nikon came in last but it was still looking pretty darn good and of course, it was handi-capped because of the lens opening.

Eye Relief throught the entire power lever: Advavtage Zeiss. The Leupold VX-3 has very generous eye relief but one has to readjust ,slightly on the upper end of the power range. With the Zeiss, I didn't but remember, mine doesn't go as high as my Leupold. The Nikon had good eye relief, just not as much of it.

Clarity: In broad daylight. I set up some International small bore targets at 200 yards. It was bright and clear and the mirage was moderate to heavy. They were all very close though.
- On 20x: Leupold. Remember, thats the max setting for the Nikon.
- On 16x: Toss-up (Nikon & Leupold).
- On 12x: Zeiss.

Reticle Contrast: Zeiss, hands down. They are the darkest I've seen but I've never looked through a Nightforce or US Optics. Just the other night I was in a local store and I was looking at a Zeiss 4.5-14x44 with a Rapid Z-800 reticle. I aimed it toward a room that was litterlty black (kinda' like a movie theater) and I could make out the broad reticles quite easily. The small tic-marks, nothing doing. I was comparing it to a Leupold VX-3 4.5-14x40 with a Boone & Crockett reticle. The B&C reticle had a gold illuminated look to it.

Reticle adjustments: Leupold. They're precise, firm and audible. The Zeiss is pretty good too. The Nikon's are mushy in comparision.

I don't profess to be an expert but I've learned quite a bit here. At some point I'll read more and test for edge-to-edge resolution.[/i]

FIRST FOLLOW ON QUESTION: If I understand you right you say its quite easy to see the Zeiss Z-Plex reticle in low light. If so it could even mean there is not absolute need for illuminated reticle for me....”

1. I could see the heavier stadia's (Don't know if I spelled that one right) of the reticle (Rapid Z-800). IIRC, there was one at 3, 6 and 9 oclock. The smaller cross hairs with the hold over points could not be made out. But, for intends and purposes, it's definitely well past sunset unless you're allowed to hunt at night.

2. The reason I was comparing the three scopes (Nikon, Zeiss, Leupold) was because something went amiss with the Nikon reticle. Its going back to Nikon tomorrow morning for repairs and I hope they cover it. If they don't, I'll replace it with another scope.

3. The reason I was comparing the Leupold B&C and the Zeiss Rapid Z-800 was because they were the only ones in the store that were similar to the Varmint Reticles which is what I was hoping to compare just in-case the Nikon isn't covered. Still don't know how the reticle went out from a 204 Ruger.

4. I really like the new Leupold for the application I got it for, target shooting for a .308 from 100 to 1000 yards. I needed plenty of internal elevation, reliability and clarity and I feel it has it. There C/S is second to none and, if you want a reticle change done, they'll do it.

5. I also like the Zeiss, especially on hunting rigs. They're a little more pricey but they too are very precise. Don't know about their Customer Service but I do know this, if you get a Zeiss and want a Rapid Z reticle, get it, because if you get a Z-Plex and want to get it changed to a Rapid Z reticle later you're SOL because they won't do that, at least not now they won't.

Jim... Thanks for your reply. Although in the comparison I feel the Nikon was handicapped by its 44mm objective compared with the 50mm objectives of the Zeiss and the Leupold, the 6x-24x 50mm should make a better showing. I went ahead and ordered the NK8428 Nikon and will report on it as soon as I get a chance to, comparing it against my Leupold's. I dont expect it to equal a $1,000-$1,200 scope in performance, but for $552.00 delivered to my door I ask are the others worth the additional $500.00 + dollars? The Nikon also has 1/8" MOA inter-changable target turrets (30 MOA internal) and they also throw in a sunshade and caps....Thats marketing

giterdone: The only down side with the Nikon I have is the turet adjustments are mushy in comparision to the others. They always tracked perfectly though. I'm still scratching by noggin' as to how a reticle went south on a 204.

As far as their customer service goes, I'll find out and report back. I purchased my scope about 5 years ago and the only thing I didn't have is the original receipt, otherwise I have everything, but do hold on to your receipt though.

HTH,

Well, got an email back from Nikon and they said they'll cover it under the warranty

Jim White....Nice that Nikon is going to repair your scope at no charge. The 6x24x50mm Monarch came while I was in Wyoming making "Prarie Hamburger" with my .204 Savage 12VLP and I have since mounted it on my Winchester HW 1885 .22-250 (28" bbl.) and have only had time to get it on paper, but I really like the fine crosshairs target dot. I will be using come-up charts for my loads and will test it at 200 and 300 next week. It will be hot like Wyoming so it will be good weather to test in. May have to bring my E-Z up canopy so I can have some shade to shoot in. So far the Nikon 6x24x50mm Monarch seems worth the price; I cant compare it to a $1,000 Leupold or a $1,800 Nightforce but you usually get what you pay for. Let us know what kind of turn around time Nikon gives you. Keep em Centered.

The most noticable difference I see between the three is the reticle adjustments. The Leupold and Zeiss have very pronounced (sound and feel) clicks. The Nikons are softer in comparision.

As far as the optics goes, especially for varmints in daylight, you'll find they are all pretty close. As the light dims then they will start seperating themselves from each other.

As far as Customer Service goes, Leupold is tough to beat. They are the only one of the three that will change out the reticle and knobs for a nominal fee. Zeiss will change some reticles but not nearly to the extent Leupold does. I don't know if Nikon swaps reticles or not. Another issue with Nikon is they only put 90 day warranties on refurbished scopes. Zeiss and Leupold have the full warranties on their refurbs.

gitterdone,

I've had the opportunity to eyeball my new (replaced under warranty) Nikon 6-24x50 FCD scope against my Leupold 8.5-25x50 (VX-3) and a Zeiss Conquest 6.5-20x50 in moderate mirage reading lettering @ 200 yards.

In comparision, the Zeiss and Leupold are sharper than the Nikon, hands down. In fact, with my Nikon, anything over 20x is quite fuzzy compared to the other two. In dark (light gathering) settings, it trails the Zeiss and Leupold as well.

All-in-all, considering its $300-400 less it performs pretty good but it trails the Conquest and new Leupold (VX-3), IMO.

Hope this helps.

Jim