Author Topic: Laser Rangefinders (Read 2372 times)

Graybeard · « **on:** November 27, 2002, 01:08:25 PM »

On my Products Test Page I have a review of the Bushnell YP-1000. I highly recommend it. Have no experience with the other.

http://www.graybeardoutdoors.com/product_test/index.shtml

GB

DEPUTY · « **Reply #1 on:** November 27, 2002, 04:32:13 PM »

i have had both and a pair of the old bushy 400's i eneded up with the lecias! little more compact and brighter optics less clutter in the image! just my personal opinion! :roll:

rickyp · « **Reply #2 on:** November 28, 2002, 10:10:11 AM »

How well can you see the numbers on the bushnell range finder in low light? I am looking for one but I want one that I can see the numbers in the low light of early morning and late evening.
handgunhunting@aol.com

Graybeard · « **Reply #3 on:** November 28, 2002, 01:22:28 PM »

Low light is OK but no light is not. There is no back lighting or illumination of any kind. You have black display and when it gets too dark it is not visible. I think this applies to all range finders but for sure to the Bushnells.

GB

Zachary · « **Reply #4 on:** December 08, 2002, 08:37:35 AM »

I have the bushnell 800 and it works great. In fact, I recently used it on a hunting trip in Texas and ranged everything from trees, to feeders, to hogs, to deer, to houses, to people, to trucks, to rocks, to you name it. It has performed flawlessly.

Zachary

Naphtali · « **Reply #5 on:** January 14, 2003, 05:01:01 AM »

Mike, Zach, Graybeard,

I am bending this discussion a little. I own no laser rangefinder, but I do own Zeiss 8x30 B/GA IF ClassiC binocular with their F2 rangefinder.

Do you folks shoot at such range that the precision of a laser rangefinder is essential? If yes, what range is this? I am a muzzleloader. Zeiss' rangefinder reticle is convenient that it lets me accurately estimate how far -- in distance as well as time -- until I am within shooting range.

Shooting range -- that is, under 120 yards -- doesn't require rangefinding, even though I cross check anyway.

If I am missing a bet, please help me out.

Graybeard · « **Reply #6 on:** January 14, 2003, 07:16:20 AM »

Not generally I don't. BUT I do bow hunt sometimes and bowhunters have a real need to know ranges as the trajectory of arrows is such a VERY small error is a BIG miss.

I also hunt with handguns quite a bit and so often wish to hold my shots to under 50 yards say when using an iron sight handgun. I find a range finder handy to check distances to various land marks around a stand to have a better feel for what is in and out of that 50 yard range.

Generally for most other hunting I do I can't see far enough for it to matter. Still I like to play with them. The new Camo Scout is becoming my real favorite. Compact enough for a shirt pocket but accurate enough for longer ranges than I'd ever consider shooting at big game.

GB

Zachary · « **Reply #7 on:** January 14, 2003, 07:31:20 AM »

Naphtali,

My Bushnell YP 800 works great, but it's really not necessary for my rifle hunting because most, if not all, of my shots are generally 100 yards or less.

For me, the laser rangefinder is actually more fun than practical. :grin:

Zachary

Naphtali · « **Reply #8 on:** January 14, 2003, 08:45:14 AM »

AHA! I get it now. Then, so far as hunters are concerned, these laser rangefinders are intended for precise measurements for very short-ranged weapons rather than ranges where you no longer hunt -- you target shoot at live targets? And I use mine for gross measurement at very long range -- apples and watermelon.

Then I can assume the rangefinders that initiated this discussion are for, perhaps, 200 yards and under?

Zachary · « **Reply #9 on:** January 14, 2003, 10:07:01 AM »

No, I would say that your assumption is incorrect. I merely stated that I PERSONALLY use a laser rangefinder for fun because most of my shots are within 100 yards or so. This does NOT mean that ALL people shoot at distances under 200 yards. Even then, I believe that a laser rangefinder would be helpful at those kinds of distances.

Zachary

cliffs · « **Reply #10 on:** January 21, 2003, 06:12:38 PM »

I have had both the Bushnell 800 which is the same unit as the Nikon 800 by the way and now have a Leica 1200. The Bushnell is long gone with it's poor quality optics and low light uselessness. With the Leica I now don't need binocs unless a lot of glassing is necessary. The Leica works better at longer ranges too. The Bushnell 800 won't range a tree at 400 yards and the Leica works at twice that distance. Where I shoot a shot at 400 yards is a real possibility, under perfect conditions only of course, no wind good rest and good light. The Bushnell will not range a deer at that range and the Leica will. That plus the fact I only paid 40 dollars more for the Leica. I would spend the extra for the quality again in a heartbeat.

BLUESBERRY · « **Reply #11 on:** February 25, 2003, 01:56:03 PM »

Hello ,,, I have a Bushnell 1000, bought it to go out west, real hard to judge the distances out there. I live in Pa, and ,shooting distances here are from 30 to 100 yards, so i dont need this rangefinder anymore... So iam selling it , used one trip out west, no scratches,or nicks,like new, with original box and pappers, 200.00$ plus shipping,,, if interested, please e-mail me at bruce581@attbi.com thanks....Bruce