Quality rangefinders?

H

HMG

Member
Rating - 100%
36   0   0
Location
Mission BC
From what i understand leica makes some of the best hunting rangefinders. Opinions? Anyone using the 1200 and 1600 models? And what are your experiences with these?
 
Used to have the 1200, now use the 1600.. both are great units, better than an elite 1500 in both ranging and glass quality. If you don't need to range that far, the elite would suffice and save you some $$.
 
HMG said:
From what i understand leica makes some of the best hunting rangefinders. Opinions? Anyone using the 1200 and 1600 models? And what are your experiences with these?
Click to expand...

Excellent rangefinders for sure but I'd rate the Zeiss and Swaro above them.
 
I would rate my LRF1200 an 8.5 out of 10 for my uses. I tend to range beyond 1000 yards routinely, and it can't quite make it that far under poor conditions. In good conditions it'll do over 1300 yards on occasion. The Zeiss ranges about the same distances as my LRF, in equal conditions, but it does so a little bit more consistently. If the CRF1600 gets 1000+ readings in bad conditions more reliably than the LRF, then the 1600 and the Zeiss are probably about equal as far as capabilities are concerned. The swaro ranges farther and more consistently than the Leica 1200, but it is also larger, heavier, and has a less precise reticle.
 
seems to me i'm always ranging after the shot. or ranging well before the shot to make mental notes. save the money and use the Bushnell.
 
i have the 1200 leica crf model .farthest i have ranged is just over 1300 yards .mine seems to range more farther distances when there is cloud cover .
 
Leica

wheels said:
Used to have the 1200, now use the 1600.. both are great units, better than an elite 1500 in both ranging and glass quality. If you don't need to range that far, the elite would suffice and save you some $$.
Click to expand...

X2. At 600 yards or less I would go with a less expensive option. That being said, I had a 1200 and now have a Leica 1600 and would not give them up.
 
I have a Leica 1200 Scan and it is a great optic. It might not have the fancy options of some rangefinders, but it is also very easy to use (of course). I am wanting to compare it a Swaro or a 1600 but have not had the opportunity.

My biggest gripe with the 1200 is that its performance in snow or rain is less than stellar. It still performs better than other rangefinders, but I am always looking for better performance. The price jump from a 1200 to a 1600 or Swaro is pretty steep too, which is one of the other reasons I would like to try before I buy.
 
gorky said:
I have a Leica 1200 Scan and it is a great optic. It might not have the fancy options of some rangefinders, but it is also very easy to use (of course). I am wanting to compare it a Swaro or a 1600 but have not had the opportunity.

My biggest gripe with the 1200 is that its performance in snow or rain is less than stellar. It still performs better than other rangefinders, but I am always looking for better performance. The price jump from a 1200 to a 1600 or Swaro is pretty steep too, which is one of the other reasons I would like to try before I buy.
Click to expand...

It seems the only thing that's ever considered when purchasing a range finder is how far it will range but optical qualitty plays a huge role at long ranges as does cone size of the laser. Laser cone size is nearly an impossible spec to find on rangefinders but it varies wildly. Rangefinders that have issues in the rain or snow typically rely on larger cone angles. Not only does this result in poor accuracy at long ranges, it also makes use in adverse weather difficult and when trying to shoot through obstructions. Compare the Leica to a Zeiss or Swaro and I bet you see a difference.
 
sheephunter said:
It seems the only thing that's ever considered when purchasing a range finder is how far it will range but optical qualitty plays a huge role at long ranges as does cone size of the laser. Laser cone size is nearly an impossible spec to find on rangefinders but it varies wildly. Rangefinders that have issues in the rain or snow typically rely on larger cone angles. Not only does this result in poor accuracy at long ranges, it also makes use in adverse weather difficult and when trying to shoot through obstructions. Compare the Leica to a Zeiss or Swaro and I bet you see a difference.
Click to expand...

I am inferring that the Zeiss or Swaro utilizes a smaller laser cone size and, thus, is more reliable and/or accurate at longer ranges and/or in adverse weather conditions ?
 
Out of curiosity, what do you guys range at 1600 yards? Houses? Mountain ranges? :confused:

I have an old Leica 800 and it's always performed great at whatever range I can shoot at game. Never really saw an advantage/purpose in being able to range out to a mile for hunting.
 
Leica crf 1600 did what most of us do work are way up and the kids get the old ones .Leica is one of the best in there survey tools and this rangefinder is great and small. Swar0voski for binnos for sure as scope the most you can afford look around the yard and sell what you have not used in the last 2 years
 
I have used the Leica 1200 and like it. Simple to use, reliable, can be a bit finicky in rain and snow. The small reticle means you usually get a reading on what you were aiming at but makes it harder to hold steady. Wish it had a tripod mounting hole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom