is either of these scopes any better than the other ?

Brightness is going to be a combination of objective diameter, magnification & lighting.

I've never found my monarch 2~8X32 lacking even at the end of the day under heavy tree cover.

Sharpness will resolve the lines on a target at 8X from 100yds. I can't imagine needing more than that.
 
I just looked at these on Optics Planet. For $399.95 you can take your pick between 3 different Monarch 3's, a Prostaff 5, or a Prostaff 7.
I guess you just pick the size, reticle, and turrets you want. Some have rebates.
 
I saw prostaff 7 in 30 mm tube today. Loved the thicker crosshairs with super fine in the middle. 4x12. I have a prostaff 5 with mil- dot reticle and my crosshairs are too thick for precision shooting as the crosshairs are thicker than the dime sized target I'm trying to acquire. My husband picked up a bushnell elite 4200 2x10 with great crosshairs and the rain guard lenses. Light clarification not 10 minutes of difference between Nikon and Bushnell. We have a few Leupold VXIII's which are good scopes but for double the money the quality isn't much difference. Elite 4200 as good if not better. I guess our favorite is the older Zeiss conquest that 5 years ago was $499.00. The newer divari doesn't come close. Got to get eyes checked as it seems no matter what I do with the ocular adjuster lately it seems crosshairs are clear and target somewhat blurry. Not fun getting older but beats the alternative.
 
Thank you for all the replies. As for the clear cross hairs and blurry target you may find a scope with adjustable objective lens would help.
 
I have a 3-9x40 Prostaff on one rifle and a 3-9x40 Monarch on another one and I quite frankly can't find any difference at all between the two.
 
The Monarch is their upper end but you may not be able to tell the difference except under low light conditions. During broad daylight all current scopes look real good but if you compare them late in the evening at the same power settings you should see a difference, I can between a Leupold VX II and a VXIII
the VXIII was much brighter even tho it has a smaller front lens. A compact Burris looked just as good as the VARI-X II, Burris also had smaller front lense. The real difference is the lenses and the better coatings used n the high end scopes. This from my experience with 3 different rifles one evening when I was running out of daylight.
 
I think your correct Rebs. Anything over 9 or 10 power gets worse. My 2.5 x 10 doesn't do this. It's first 14 power I've owned without adjustable objective. My 8-22 nightforce i owned when they first hit the U.S. was probably the nicest scope I'd ever owned. $700.00 at the time. Way out of my limits now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top