In my experience, the major differences will be the First Focal in the Vortex vs. Second and the side focus parallax instead of fixed parallax in the Prostaff. both strong influences to favor the Vortex in a field rifle. My pricing today shows about $50 spread from the Nikon up to the Vortex, and for me, side focus and FFP is worth far more than $50.
Part of what makes Nikon appear more clear to most folks is the color truth, so they appear brighter than a properly filtered or poorly contrasted coating. Until you get into high angle lights or low lights and they fall apart. My major issue with Nikons, beyond that difference in FFP vs. SFP in these two particular models, is the lensing effect they have at high magnification. It’s subtle, but it leaves me with a migraine after a range day. The older models - and some new - have extremely limited windage and elevation adjustment ranges, nothing like dropping a grand for a 6-24x Monarch and finding out it can’t dial past 800 for your rifle (my own fault for not reading the specs more closely; lived and learned). The Nikons aren’t bad scopes by any stretch, but I only buy them when they are on extreme sales and priced competitively to far lesser quality and lower featured scopes.
In this case, I’d pay slightly more for the Vortex’s features, knowing the glass will be sufficiently similar to not be a major determining factor.
