Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Nikon vs Leupold

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by AirplaneDoc, Dec 22, 2007.

?

Leupold vs Nikon optics

Poll closed Mar 31, 2008.
  1. Leupold

    55 vote(s)
    63.2%
  2. Nikon

    32 vote(s)
    36.8%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. AirplaneDoc

    AirplaneDoc Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    Messages:
    351
    Location:
    Midwest
    Looking for a new scope for my AR for paper punching, maybe a little vermin punching as well. Holding things equal other than price, how do optics compare between Nikon and Leupold? Is a Leupold enough better to command the higher price?

    Looking at the 5-700 range.

    Thx
     
  2. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    I have both. Both are very good scopes. I believe Nikon is a better value for the money. I own more Leupolds than Nikons, but its because I was able to find what I wanted quicker if I got a Leupold.
     
  3. AirplaneDoc

    AirplaneDoc Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    Messages:
    351
    Location:
    Midwest
    Thanks, That is exactly the kind of info I am looking for
     
  4. justice4all

    justice4all Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    341
    Location:
    Port Angeles, Washington
    Leupold optics are excellent. Once I started buying them, I stopped buying anything else.
     
  5. Ratshooter

    Ratshooter Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,341
    Location:
    Burleson,Texas
    I only have the low end versions of each. I have a 2x7 and 2 3x9 leupold VX1s. In the Nikon brand i have 2 4x and a 3x9 in the Pro Staff series.

    The Leupold has a bigger field of vision. The Nikons are bright and seem very rugged. The Nikons were cheaper. I like both. Both are far better than the cheap, short eye relief scopes i have bought in the past. Both were a step up for me. I have bought expensive rifles and stopped at a good scope. Those days are gone.

    I have a Burris fullfield 3x9 i like also.

    I have compared my Leupold 3x9 side by side with my buddies 3x10 VX111 and can't tell a nickles worth of difference. This was while sitting on a deer stand in field conditions. All Leupolds have the same lifetime warranty.
     
  6. Reyn

    Reyn Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    484
    Location:
    AL
    At the top of each's line the difference optically is so close you will have people debate it til the end of time.

    The part that makes Leupold so great has been their warranty.
     
  7. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,684
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    Within the same price range, the Nikon will have slightly better optics but the Leupold will be made of much sterner stuff; thicker bodies, better anodizing, and so forth.
     
  8. Legionnaire
    • Contributing Member

    Legionnaire Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    4,416
    Location:
    Texas
    I have both; can't go wrong with either; I prefer the Leupolds.
     
  9. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,056
    Location:
    United Socialist States of Obama
    Thats a good point, but I have never had to use a warranty with a Leupold or Nikon.
     
  10. AirplaneDoc

    AirplaneDoc Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    Messages:
    351
    Location:
    Midwest
    Nikon lists lifetime warranty on some of their scopes, is it hit or miss?
     
  11. CZ223

    CZ223 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,672
    I have several Leupolds

    I also have one Nikon Monarch 6.5x20. The Nikon is by far the brightest clearest scope I own. The only downside to it is that the crosshairs are so fine that when the sun hits it just rigth they will wash out.
     
  12. AtticusThraxx

    AtticusThraxx Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    191
    Location:
    Bay Area Ca.
    I have the same Nikon, CZ and the screw on sun shade that came with it helps alot with washout at least where I shoot. Dang nice scopes for the $$$!
     
  13. jeepmor

    jeepmor Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,827
    Location:
    Stumptown
    I considered them both pretty hard last year and time spent at the SW optics counter had the Leupolds and Nikons neck and neck in quality and clarity, with Nikon having a slight price advantage when comparing the equivalent models. You didn't get better optics until you entered into the scopes that run $800 plus each like the Swarovski, Zeiss and so forth.

    I have a Leupold on my hunting rifle. Nikon has the new BDC (bullet drop compensator) that takes a lot of guess work out of long range shots.
     
  14. Kimber1911_06238

    Kimber1911_06238 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,548
    Location:
    AZ
    I prefer leupolds, but i also have a nikon and think it's a great scope.
     
  15. PAPACHUCK

    PAPACHUCK Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    472
    Location:
    Who Dat Nation
    The Nikon scopes are equal to the Leopold is all aspects, minus low-light situations, where Leopold holds a slight advantage. For morning/evening hunters, I'd say get the Leopold. For target shooting, or hunting varmits, same a few bucks and buy the Nikon.
     
  16. rundm

    rundm Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2007
    Messages:
    198
    Both are good scopes. Light transmission is a little better on the nikon if you look at the specs. Leupold is around 92-93% except for the LPS which is about as good as you can get and also has a price like some of the best european brands. Nikon is about 95.5-96%. Can most people tell the diff, probably not? I have both. Never needed to use the warranty either. Have heard many stories about Nikons customer service not being all that great. Like I said, I have never needed to use it to find out. RG
     
  17. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,684
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    Actually, the Nikon bodies are made of much thinner alloys (and dent a lot more easily as a result). The Nikon anodizing is far thinner, and the Nikon will show ring marks and scratches under circumstances where a Leupold would not. The Nikon power ring will be much stiffer and harder to use.

    But the Nikon will likely have better glass/coatings.
     
  18. AirplaneDoc

    AirplaneDoc Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    Messages:
    351
    Location:
    Midwest
    Thanks for the imput, there is one of each NIB comming up at a auction soon, so I will see what happens there, If I can get a great deal, I might go for one of them. otherwise I will be going shopping soon. I haven't bought yet so keep posting your thouhts.

    THX

    AD
     
  19. tblt

    tblt member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    954
    Location:
    florida
    nikon

    I have bothin 3-9.I like the nikon better it is clearer.
     
  20. xringer3

    xringer3 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    42
    Location:
    N.E. Oklahoma
    I have a leupold VXIII and a Nikon Pro Staff. The nikon seems to have more clarity and holds a zero better. That surprised me as the cost difference was about 300.00! I'll stick to the Nikon for further purchases for my rifles.
     
  21. Mr White

    Mr White Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,207
    Location:
    Central PA
    My Nikon 4-14 Buckmaster cost about as much as a Leupold VXI but IMO is equal in performance to a VXII.
     
  22. geojap

    geojap Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    787
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    I was considering scopes recently. One that you will want to check out is Sightron. I got a Sightron SII Big Sky model, which is equivalent to Leupold VX-III glass. The Sightron is a well-made and sturdy scope, available for less scratch than a Leupold. It is also made in Japan, not the Philippines or China. Don't get me wrong, I love Leupolds (I still have one in my closet), but the Sightron was a better buy.
     
  23. eliphalet

    eliphalet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,682
    Location:
    Idaho
    Leupold's VXII's or better can have he reticle changed at any time for $50, will Nikon?

    Had couple of pairs of Nikon Binoculars. In a sometimes treated rough hunting environment they kinda fell apart. They were good bino's for the price so was gonna get another pair but ended up with Leupold's instead. They are at the very least as good as the Nikon's and warranted forever. So far they are fine but if they do fail to function from hard wear I know the fix is free.

    Time will tell on the scope warranty's. We've sent in a 40 year old Leupold that was fixed free, have others at least that old that are still as good as new. No Nikon's on any gun so no idea how they do as a company for customer service, Just know for sure once you have a Leupold on your rifle it is good forever or fixed free.

    I would use either but if buying new would choose the Leupold.
     
  24. rbernie
    • Contributing Member

    rbernie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Messages:
    20,684
    Location:
    Norra Texas
    Word.

    I have at least a dozen Sightron SII's on rifles that I count on, because they are the best bang-for-the-buck in moderately-priced optics. Having said that, it should be noted that Sightrons finish simply isn't as durable as Leupolds.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page