Nikon or Redfield

[hornady]

The last few years I Have been buying Nikon scopes, and am very happy with them, But years ago I would only buy Redfield, I need too replace one of my Rifle scopes, Just a basic 3 X 9 X 40, The gun shop I Deal with I get the Nikons for about $140.00.
From what I have read the Redfield’s run about the same. Problem is my shop is not a Redfield dealer, I checked on-line there are a couple dealers close to me, but is the Redfield worth the extra hassle.
Or in this price range just get another Nikon.

[eye shot]

I have the Nikon Monarch and the new Redfield 3x9x40 both with BDC. I like both scopes but I think my next one will be another Redfield. In low light they are very close to the same. The Monarch was alot more than $140 and the Redfield was $159.

[hornady]

Thanks for the reply, the two scopes I wanted to compare were the Redfield Revolution, and the Nikon pro Staff, Mid-South sells the Nikon for $159.95, a local gun shop has it for $139.99, and Mid-south sells the Redfield for $149.99, I have not done much checking on the Redfield, but I should be able to get it locally for about $140.00 or less.
I know the scopes listed may not be as good as the Monarch, but for the little amount of Deer hunting I do anymore and punching paper it’s a pretty decent scope for the money.

[JimG]

I am very unhappy with my Redfield. Unlikely to buy another Leupold product again because of this.

[AtlLaw]

Whoa Nelly!   
Details JimG!  Details! 

[yooper77]

The last few years I Have been buying Nikon scopes, and am very happy with them, But years ago I would only buy Redfield, I need too replace one of my Rifle scopes, Just a basic 3 X 9 X 40, The gun shop I Deal with I get the Nikons for about $140.00.
From what I have read the Redfield’s run about the same. Problem is my shop is not a Redfield dealer, I checked on-line there are a couple dealers close to me, but is the Redfield worth the extra hassle.
Or in this price range just get another Nikon.

I would pick the Redfield, since it is made by Leupold.

Better yet, shop away from the local shop and save huge bundle by buying online.

I suggest a Leupold VX-I or VX-II, because they are the best in optics in my experience.

yooper77

[Swampman]

The Nikon Prostaff is a much better scope.  It's as good as or better than the Leupold VX-II.

[Halwg]

I am very unhappy with my Redfield. Unlikely to buy another Leupold product again because of this.

My brother was ready to purchase a Redfield Revolution on my recommendation.  But then he went to the gun shop to check one out.  They mounted it on one of the stock mounts that lets you view the scope as if mounted on a rifle.  He said it was really bad, dark, distorted, and fuzzy around the edges.  The owner of the shop couldn't believe it was so bad.  They looked through another and it was exactly the same.  I'm not sure if this was a bad batch, or what, but the ones I looked through in 2-7X33 were clear as a bell.  I thought they looked as good as my Bushnell Elite 3200.

I guess I would suggest actually looking through one before you decide to buy it.

[yooper77]

I know what country Leupold's are made in, but just curious where are Nikons made?

If not the U.S.A. then hopefully they are made in Japan?

I have had good luck with Weaver scopes made in Japan in the past. I still have two one on my Encore 223 Remington rifle barrel in 2-10x38mm, and one on my German Mauser 243 Winchester in 3-9x38mm.

yooper77

[yooper77]

I am very unhappy with my Redfield. Unlikely to buy another Leupold product again because of this.

My brother was ready to purchase a Redfield Revolution on my recommendation.  But then he went to the gun shop to check one out.  They mounted it on one of the stock mounts that lets you view the scope as if mounted on a rifle.  He said it was really bad, dark, distorted, and fuzzy around the edges.  The owner of the shop couldn't believe it was so bad.  They looked through another and it was exactly the same.  I'm not sure if this was a bad batch, or what, but the ones I looked through in 2-7X33 were clear as a bell.  I thought they looked as good as my Bushnell Elite 3200.

I guess I would suggest actually looking through one before you decide to buy it.

I only recommended the Redfield Revolution scope for the OP since its made by Leupold.  Leupold’s made in United States of America scopes have the best no hassle warranty in the business.  Would I purchase a Redfield Revolution scope for myself, nope?  I have many Leupold scopes Vari-X II, VX-I, VX-II and VX-III, these are all flawless optics and are pure pleasure to have in the field.

yooper77

[Lloyd Smale]

I havent tried a new redfield so i cant comment there but ive got a couple prostaffs i bought new at the same time and wouldnt give you a plugged nickle for another one. Field of view seems narrow and there low light performance is pretty dismal. I recently picked up a 3200 bushnell and its 5 times the scope. It puts even my buckmaster to shame in low light. Anymore nikons come into this house will have to say monarch on them.

[Swampman]

The 3200 is a great scope with very little eye relief.  I much prefer the Nikon Prostaff.

[klt1986]

I know what country Leupold's are made in, but just curious where are Nikons made?

If not the U.S.A. then hopefully they are made in Japan?

I have had good luck with Weaver scopes made in Japan in the past. I still have two one on my Encore 223 Remington rifle barrel in 2-10x38mm, and one on my German Mauser 243 Winchester in 3-9x38mm.

yooper77

Leupold scopes are designed, machined, assembled, and tested in the U.S.  However, they do have parts from over seas in them.

http://www.leupold.com/corporate/about-us/americas-optics-authority/

[Lloyd Smale]

I use a 3200 3x9 on a #1b and there notorious for needing a scope with lots of eye relief and it has worked great on that gun

The 3200 is a great scope with very little eye relief.  I much prefer the Nikon Prostaff.

[Swampman]

I use a 3200 3x9 on a #1b and there notorious for needing a scope with lots of eye relief and it has worked great on that gun

The 3200 is a great scope with very little eye relief.  I much prefer the Nikon Prostaff.

It must be a very light caliber.

[Lloyd Smale]

7mag. Not heavy recoiling in a 9lb gun but not a 243 either. As a matter of fact i moved it to an 06 700 rem yesterday and took it to the range and it worked fine on that one too. It doesnt have the eye relief a leupold has but it has as much as my nikon scopes.

[Siskiyou]

I am using a Nikon Buckmaster 3x9 BDC.  I like the glass but I will not buy another one with the BDC crosshair.  The Ballistic Plex on the Burris scopes does not clutter the scope like Nikons version. 

I was shooting at 200 yards the other day with the Nikon w/ BDC.  I used the BDC and did not like it because it is a little too much clutter with the scope set at 9X.  I switch to using the primary crosshair as I normally do when using a none BDC scope.  My group immediately tightened up.

I might appreciate the BDC more at 400 yards.

It is not often that I crank a scope up to full power to shoot a deer.  I did crank one up to ten power when the deer was over 250 yards.  Have to admit the dancing crosshair on the deer’s chest had me thinking out the shot.

When I purchased the Nikon Buckmaster I compared them side by side with the Nikon Buckmaster, and the Prostaff. I preferred the Buckmaster.  It is a good clean glass and I have had not fogging issues.  I was watching a bear in my scope last year and if I had a tag in my pocket I would have filled it. 

[Lloyd Smale]

Well i went scope shopping yesterday and picked up a couple vx2 leupolds and a 4x12 redfield. Ive got a gun on layaway at gander mountain the redfields going on so ill let you know what i think after a couple months use. Just a quick assesment so far. The scopes seems real clear. Probably as good as the two leupolds. the only fault i can see so far is the adjustment knobs seem a bit chincy. But then agin the leupolds were 300 bucks and this redfield was a 160. Which was a 100 bucks less then even a comparable vx1 and there friction adjustments never impressed me. I have to say ive never had problems with them but still like a click adjustment when sighting in a gun.

[Swampman]

I found the "finish" on the Redfields to be very disappointing.  The thin metal tubes also seemed "delicate."

[Lloyd Smale]

I was fooling around last night at dark thirty and lined up the 4x12x 40 redfield a 3x9 3200 bushnell  a 3x9 prostaff a 3x9 varix1 leupold and a 3x9vx2 luepold to see which perfomed best in low light. The vx2 did the best followed closely by the3200 and redfield which were to close to call. the vx1 leupold and the prostaff were pretty close but also pretty far behind the other three. The vx2 was definately the winner but cost at least a 100 bucks more then any of the others and should have been. Bang for the buck had to go to the redfield and 3200. Both cost less then the vx1 and only slightly more then the prostaff and probably performed better then about any of the scopes a guy would have bought 10 years ago at any price.

[Swampman]

I've done the same thing and had very different results.

[tangob5]

I have looked over the Redfield line and I'm really not to impressed with them.  They are the equivalent of the Leupold Rifleman.  For those who live and breathe Nikon they do not manufacture their own scopes or lenses.  They are made by Asia Optical.  The Buckmaster and Monarch glass is made in the Phillipines as well as the glass of many other brands.  For the the same price range as the Redfield I'd look at a couple of different brands.  Burris Fullfield II and the Vortex Diamondback.  Myself I spend a bit more on glass and they all begin with Leupold VX-2 or VX-3. Here is a link where one person who is well versed in optics did a comparison of inexpensive scopes under $200.
http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=21176

Need some more information try this site.   http://www.charm.net/~kmarsh/scope.html#choose

[JimG]

The details as to why I'm unhappy with Leupold-

I bought a Redfield 2x7x33 recently. The reticle was slightly crooked in the tube when compared to the turrets. The click adjustments were extremely mushy feeling. I mounted the scope anyway. At 100 yards each click should equal 1/4". B/S! Each click with both the elevation and windage turrets varied from doing nothing to as much as 3/4" and that's PER CLICK. The rifle was an extremely accurate Knight ML. I returned the scope to the retailer. I owned a Leupold RX-1 rangefinder that was a dud right out of the box. My Leupold bore sighter is a waste of time as well. Three Leupold products, three pieces of over priced junk. I've NEVER, repeat NEVER had a problem with Bushnell or Nikon. I put the Nikon Omega back on the Knight and never looked back. I have seen some real crud come out of the Bushnell Chinese factory though lately. A friend bought a Banner shotgun scope that works but has a canted reticle. However my Bushnells have worked just fine. I just bought a Nikon Slughunter to put on my new H-R Ultra slug gun. Works like a charm. For those who are interested, you can buy the Nikon WITHOUT the BDC reticles. I do.

[Huffmanite]

You may want to consider this scope under Nitrex brand at Natchez.  Nitrex and Weaver both owned by ATK and these top line scopes made in Japan.  Between Natchez discounted prices on Nitrex models and Nitrex rebate program ongoing now, these top line model scopes are a great bargain.  By the way, its my opinion Natchez is a little high on their shipping charges.....example ordered a higher powered Nitrex a few days ago and shipping/insurance to me in Texas was $17.    By the way, scope you'll see in below link is Nitrex equal to a Weaver Grand Slam scope.....check out Weaver price on them.

http://www.natchezss.com/product.cfm?contentID=productDetail&brand=WE&prodID=WE94562&prodTitle=Nitrex TR One 3-9x42mm Rifle Scope Gloss Finish TrexPlex Reticle

[Lloyd Smale]

bashing leupolds is the in thing to do lately. Tell you what i have a bunch of them and have never had a lick of trouble with any of them. I think part of the redfield bashing comes from the fact there made by leupold. Sure there not vx2s or 3s but i picked up a 2x7 and a 4x12 for a 100 bucks and a 150 respectively and there hands down the best bang for the buck in a scope ive seen yet. Yes the ajustments are a bit mushy but mine track accurately. Id take the mush ajustments of the redfields over the crap optics of prostaff any day. Bottom line though is if you have 100 more bucks to spend buy a 3200 bushnell and if you have a 200 bucks more buy a leupold vx2 or a nikon monarch. I have about every brand of scope and dont have the mentality that if i bought it it must be the best. If i see a turd i call it a turd and the prostaffs are turds. Put a cheap redfield side by side and look through them. Its about like someone turned the lights on there that much brighter and dont have near the distortion around the edges. I guess everyones eyes are differnt but ive had at least a half a dozen people look at the redfield and the nikon side by side and to a man they said the redfield had much better glass. Im not a nikon basher. I have 4 of them right now and both my compact and full sized binoculars are nikons and i like them and i do like the monarchs but prostaffs are TURDS

[Swampman]

I like Leupolds ok and I will likely never buy one of the newer brands coming on the market.  There are so many good inexpensive scopes available I just see little reason to spend a lot of money.  $200.00 is pretty much the limit for me.  Mostly I prefer Nikons and Bushnells.

[demented]

 Perhaps the 3200 series Bushnells are good but I've been burned so many times by Bushnell crap that I can't seem to forget long enough to buy anything Bushnell.  I don't like Nikons Prostaff, tunnel vision, edge distortion plus all but one (6 total) I've sighted for people have been bullet chasing !@##.  Need to move three inches, make the adjustments only to find it moved one inch ....or two, never what I wanted.  Then after more adjustments and firing a few times, they moved too far so its back to the drawing board, wasted ammo and time.  I've used those maligned Leupolds for 25 years with zero problems AFTER I got tired of Bushnell, Simmons, Tasco, Denver Redfields not doing their job.  That all but the RF's were Japanese made didn't seem to make one bit of difference, they were not reliable. Until I begin having my LP's let go I'll keep buying what has always worked well for me.  All mine will pass the "box" test anytime, everytime and will shoot the same groups all the way through their magnification range.

[Swampman]

I might have said the same thing 10 years ago.  None of the issues mentioned are a problem with current Bushnells or Nikons, even the cheapest models.

[yooper77]

Perhaps the 3200 series Bushnells are good but I've been burned so many times by Bushnell crap that I can't seem to forget long enough to buy anything Bushnell.  I don't like Nikons Prostaff, tunnel vision, edge distortion plus all but one (6 total) I've sighted for people have been bullet chasing !@##.  Need to move three inches, make the adjustments only to find it moved one inch ....or two, never what I wanted.  Then after more adjustments and firing a few times, they moved too far so its back to the drawing board, wasted ammo and time.  I've used those maligned Leupolds for 25 years with zero problems AFTER I got tired of Bushnell, Simmons, Tasco, Denver Redfields not doing their job.  That all but the RF's were Japanese made didn't seem to make one bit of difference, they were not reliable. Until I begin having my LP's let go I'll keep buying what has always worked well for me.  All mine will pass the "box" test anytime, everytime and will shoot the same groups all the way through their magnification range.

You speak the truth; Leupold's have never let me down and never will.

yooper77

[Lloyd Smale]

sure have to agree.

Perhaps the 3200 series Bushnells are good but I've been burned so many times by Bushnell crap that I can't seem to forget long enough to buy anything Bushnell.  I don't like Nikons Prostaff, tunnel vision, edge distortion plus all but one (6 total) I've sighted for people have been bullet chasing !@##.  Need to move three inches, make the adjustments only to find it moved one inch ....or two, never what I wanted.  Then after more adjustments and firing a few times, they moved too far so its back to the drawing board, wasted ammo and time.  I've used those maligned Leupolds for 25 years with zero problems AFTER I got tired of Bushnell, Simmons, Tasco, Denver Redfields not doing their job.  That all but the RF's were Japanese made didn't seem to make one bit of difference, they were not reliable. Until I begin having my LP's let go I'll keep buying what has always worked well for me.  All mine will pass the "box" test anytime, everytime and will shoot the same groups all the way through their magnification range.

You speak the truth; Leupold's have never let me down and never will.

yooper77