Range Finders

[joelitespeed]

Thinking of adding one to my hunting gear. Anyone use one? Any recommendations or warnings of devices?

I will be hunting in new to me Elk County in very hilly territory both bow and rifle.

[TerryK]

I have a small Leica 1200. It is expensive but totally reliable. It gets the distance on the first try. It also has good optics. Generally swfa sample list has used or demo ones at a reduced price.

[PAHunter1183]

Just a piece of advice, but in my experience, you get what you pay for. A cheap range finder should be decent for archery ranges, but if you really want accurate long distance ranges you need to buy one of the more expensive ones. I prefer the Nikons myself, but do not have enough experience with other brands to say if they are good or bad...

[unclejumbo]

Yup, had a cheap one and now I have a Leica. The difference in ability and clarity was worth the $.

[joelitespeed]

Thanks All. Looking at this Leupold:

http://www.leupold.com/hunting-shoot...r-rangefinder/

Seems to be more in line with what I would like to spend and I have always had great experiences with the scopes.

[aubie515]

I've owned the Leica...it's a good LRF, but the Leupold has newer/better technology. Leica is not only larger, but it's much heavier. You cannot get good readings all the time with the Leica.

The Leupold is smaller as well, which is why I sold my Leica for the Leupold.

I went with the Leupold because of it's size and it's ability to range with angles. You can use the Leupold for archery or for rifle hunting.

Vortex also has a comparable LRF to the Leupold. Vortex has a lifetime warranty and Leupold does not have lifetime warranty. I still liked the Leupold more.

My friend and I are long range shooters and we both had Leicas and sold them for the Leupold if that is any indicator.

[soup]

I picked up this

Range Finder

I wanted something relatively inexpensive strictly for bow hunting. So far so good.

[340M&P]

I had a bushnell for years, worked ok at best. Replaced with a Leupold 600 this past year, amazing difference. I'm sure a Leica is great, but don't have that much to spend on one.

[Tomcat088]

I've owned the Leica...it's a good LRF, but the Leupold has newer/better technology. Leica is not only larger, but it's much heavier. You cannot get good readings all the time with the Leica.

The Leupold is smaller as well, which is why I sold my Leica for the Leupold.

I went with the Leupold because of it's size and it's ability to range with angles. You can use the Leupold for archery or for rifle hunting.

Vortex also has a comparable LRF to the Leupold. Vortex has a lifetime warranty and Leupold does not have lifetime warranty. I still liked the Leupold more.

My friend and I are long range shooters and we both had Leicas and sold them for the Leupold if that is any indicator.

This is an interesting post to me Aubie, and I'm glad you are the one that posted it because it helps me believe that not all the Leupold RF's I've seen are junk. My experience with them has been completely the opposite. I'm sure that this is also dependent on conditions and what is being ranged. I agree with you that the angle compensation is definitely handy for bow hunting, and could sometimes come into play with rifle hunting.

The first season I went out elk hunting, my boss had bought a brand new Leupold 1000i, and it wouldn't range even close to as well as my Bushnell Elite 1500 would. He could range some rocks at 600 yards that I could easily range. When we say elk at a touch over 800 yards, he couldn't get any kind of reading, whereas my Bushnell Elite 1500 was pulling up readings just fine; which was how we knew they were a touch over 800 yards. When he took it out shooting with me on my private range, if we were in midday sun (spring) with a fair amount of interference, we couldn't get a range on my 12"x12" steel even using a tripod much past 650 yards. When I'd throw my Bushnell Elite 1500 on the same steel in the same conditions, we didn't start to have problems until out to almost 800 yards (780 or so if I remember right).

I upgraded to a Leica 1200 LRF (not the CRF), and it outperformed the heck out of that Bushnell Elite 1500. If I have them steady, my Leica 1200's will range that 12"x12" piece of steel at 1,000 yards with only a couple of tries in summer sun here in Texas. Which is High UV, almost no clouds, lots of mirage, etc. My Bushnell's wouldn't do it, that's for sure. So that's why I've always thought there was no way in hell that the Leupold's would do it when they couldn't past 650 yards with only some interference, there's no way they could hang with those Leica's in way more interference. I can range cows all day long at long range with the Leica 1200's, regularly past 880 yards (last exact number I recall).

I just have not had very good experience with the few Leupold models that I've used. I had some pretty good experience with the old bulky models out to 600 yards, but never had anything good happen with them past 600 yards in any kind of real field conditions. That's why this thread is interesting to me. That's why I steer people towards some of the more expensive rangefinders from Leica and Zeiss if they're very serious. If they want a budget, I usually steer them towards the Bushnell 1500 or 1600 ARC models. They're definitely not the best glass, but they've ranged better for me than lots more expensive Leupold and Nikon models. The Bushnell models also have a black display, which can be a detriment in some low light conditions, and the "led light inside" isn't the best on the Bushnell Elite models. I've been seriously moving up to a binocular rangefinder within the next year. So I may be giving the Bushnell Fusion 1 Mile a look, or waiting for a deal. I know everybody's mileage varies, but these have been my experiences so far.