Rangefinders: Angle Compensation or Not

Johnny_Coyle

All,
Thanks for the previous advice on rangefinders. I liked the Bushnell Elite 1500, however, figure on spending a bit more and getting the Leica 1200.

1) Does anyone have the Leica 1200 - if so, please advise.

2) For those that have the angle range compensation (ARC), is it an absolute "must have" or could you live without it?

The way I see it, correct me if I am wrong, the ARC stuff appears to be some generic kinematic equations - better than nothing, but is it worth the price?

kay 9

Johnny_Coyle wrote: »

All,
Thanks for the previous advice on rangefinders. I liked the Bushnell Elite 1500, however, figure on spending a bit more and getting the Leica 1200.

1) Does anyone have the Leica 1200 - if so, please advise.

2) For those that have the angle range compensation (ARC), is it an absolute "must have" or could you live without it?

The way I see it, correct me if I am wrong, the ARC stuff appears to be some generic kinematic equations - better than nothing, but is it worth the price?

Have the leica 1200 myself and it's the dogs, but dont use it as much as I'd like. I mostly use it during the day on long grey crows and the likes but that said they are wonderful at night also with great light gathering capabilities. As for that "ARC", I dont think that is very necessary unless you are going to be shooting up or down large or significant gradients.

Cernunnos3

Hi Johhny Coyle.

Just to add my 2p worth on your thread. I have the Bushnell Elite 1500, the one with ARC.

For the most part I have to agree with Kay 9, the Leica glass is proberly better glass but considerably more expensive or at least there was a sizeable difference when I was buying. So I think it does come down to what you want the rangefinder to do for you - Yes I know you want it to range find!!.

What I mean is:
What are you planning on ranging? I have had no probs with either Red or Fallow deer out to 600 meters. I have also ranged Foxes out to 211 meters at night, that was with a good lamp helping to illuiminate the situation though.
Do you want/need the rangefinder to be tripod mountable for use in a hide or high seat? The Bushnell is, I would hope for the money so is the leica.
Do you need it for all weathers? If so it will need to be waterproof.
Finally, (as this horse is a bit high) what kind of country will you be ranging over? If it reasonably flat the no the ARC is not necessary, I hunt over some of the OX mountain range at times and believe me the ARC has really come into it's own. I've never been good judging angles, or distance for that matter but the Bushnell has never let me down. It will calculate all of that for you so all you have to do is point and squezze. Once you know which bit of your reticle to use, but that a completly different thread. A remarkable little device that I for one will never leave home without.

Hope this is of some help to you or others. Take care.

Cernunnos3

vixdname

Cernunnos3 wrote: »

Hi Johhny Coyle.

Just to add my 2p worth on your thread. I have the Bushnell Elite 1500, the one with ARC.

For the most part I have to agree with Kay 9, the Leica glass is proberly better glass but considerably more expensive or at least there was a sizeable difference when I was buying. So I think it does come down to what you want the rangefinder to do for you - Yes I know you want it to range find!!.

What I mean is:
What are you planning on ranging? I have had no probs with either Red or Fallow deer out to 600 meters. I have also ranged Foxes out to 211 meters at night, that was with a good lamp helping to illuiminate the situation though.
Do you want/need the rangefinder to be tripod mountable for use in a hide or high seat? The Bushnell is, I would hope for the money so is the leica.
Do you need it for all weathers? If so it will need to be waterproof.
Finally, (as this horse is a bit high) what kind of country will you be ranging over? If it reasonably flat the no the ARC is not necessary, I hunt over some of the OX mountain range at times and believe me the ARC has really come into it's own. I've never been good judging angles, or distance for that matter but the Bushnell has never let me down. It will calculate all of that for you so all you have to do is point and squezze. Once you know which bit of your reticle to use, but that a completly different thread. A remarkable little device that I for one will never leave home without.

Hope this is of some help to you or others. Take care.

Cernunnos3

+1

murph226

Leica rangefinder for sale http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055888400

Johnny_Coyle

Cernunnos3
Thanks for the response.

Right now, the Leica 1200 is my max price. I would like to step up to the next 1600, however, I cannot justify spending more money for the glass than the gun.

Also, electronics are always getting cheaper and better...

The main purpose is to range deer, I would like accuracy out around 600-800 yards. However, my shots will be from 100-300.

I do shoot on hilly ground. I the grade is never that of Patrick's hill in Cork. Usually, it is about the gradient of Cork City Grinders (and one block up) - rolling hills.

I guess my choice comes down to accuracy - clarity - ARC.

I will take a few foxes and badgers. No tripod necessary. Yes, it has to be waterproof.

Looks like the Leica is my best fit.

At what angle/terrain would you say the ARC justifies its cost?

Thanks again.

johngalway

Why get the CRF 1200 if that's the range you'll be shooting at, why not go for the CRF 900. Or better still, keep an eye out for second hand LRF 800 or 900's, they would sell for around €250ish.

Johnny_Coyle

John,
I am not beyond taking a 600 yard shot. I actually plan on trying it a bit more and have been very successful on paper.

The reviews I have seen normally suggest that the effective range is about 50% - 75% of the claimed max range. Thus, I was thinking that the 1200 should be ideal for 600-800 yard non reflective targets.

Does Leica have the same ballistics computing from the 1600 on a cheaper model?

johngalway

Oh don't take me up wrong, I wasn't saying you couldn't shoot or anything like that, I was making a comment on the shooting range you mentioned

Leica 1600, well, since I've only just heard of it in your post I can't comment lol. It's news to me, just Googled it.

I've gotten returns of 990-999 on my CRF 900. I don't have anything to compare it with mind you. There's no ballistics calculation on my CRF 900.

Tackleberrywho

johngalway wrote: »

Oh don't take me up wrong, I wasn't saying you couldn't shoot or anything like that, I was making a comment on the shooting range you mentioned

Leica 1600, well, since I've only just heard of it in your post I can't comment lol. It's news to me, just Googled it.

I've gotten returns of 990-999 on my CRF 900. I don't have anything to compare it with mind you. There's no ballistics calculation on my CRF 900.

a day like today Sunny, My nikon can give ranges out to 800 in Theory.

I'm after scanning around me, and best I got was 535 metres to neighbors house.
That does me most times but it may not pick up trees or Bunnies at that range

johngalway

I had a Nikon Pro something 440, gave it away! Grand in summer day time, but overcast/lower light/under the lamp, fergedaboutit!

Tackleberrywho

johngalway wrote: »

I had a Nikon Pro something 440, gave it away! Grand in summer day time, but overcast/lower light/under the lamp, fergedaboutit!

mine is a buckmasters pro 800
It's ok in the poor light It is fine for what I do. Range find the fields in the summer, spak'ing of which I got that bunny hunting feeling on me

I had a Bushnell before that, absolute rubbish.

I got the Nikon second hand for €200 must be 7 years ago now, when or if it breaks I will buy a Leica, but not for the ridiculous money folk want for them

Range finder IMHO is like a GPS, after a while you use them less and less;)

johngalway

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I got the Nikon second hand for €200 must be 7 years ago now, when or if it breaks I will buy a Leica, but not for the ridiculous money folk want for them

Range finder IMHO is like a GPS, after a while you use them less and less;)

That's true, only time I use mine is if I'm really not sure if a fox is within 200 yards or not, otherwise it's point and shoot.

The Leicas have had a fair hike in price since I got mine, went on Ebay and had it sent over for something like €260 or €360, can't remember now, priced a dealer in Ireland at the time, €650 for the same model

Tackleberrywho

johngalway wrote: »

That's true, only time I use mine is if I'm really not sure if a fox is within 200 yards or not, otherwise it's point and shoot.

The Leicas have had a fair hike in price since I got mine, went on Ebay and had it sent over for something like €260 or €360, can't remember now, priced a dealer in Ireland at the time, €650 for the same model

I got one reading of 635 metres this evening with it. It would not repeat the reading

Son in summation I concede leica are better

johngalway

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I got one reading of 635 metres this evening with it. It would not repeat the reading

Son in summation I concede leica are better

I remember my Nikon days. Spot the fox with the lamp, look at him through the Nightforce. Hmmm, how far is that then? Up with the Nikon, could I see the fox? No. Could I see the eyes? No! If I was lucky there'd be a big rock or tree near him that I could range. Often felt like throwing the thing in a bog hole. Ya pay dear for good glass but by God does it make life easier.