Range Finder or Binoculars?

ranger_dave

ranger_dave

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
2   0   3
Location
Ontario
I am currently working on saving up for and building up my hunting gear. I want to get some form of optics and I can decided between a range finder or a pair of binoculars. I'd rather not carry both to save myself $ and weight in my pack. Now I am more so leaning towards a range finder becasue I like the whole concept of it telling you the distance on what your looking at(the whole point:p) and also seem to be more compact then binoculars. They also seem to be cheaper. The only thing I am not sure of is if range finders have zoom or is it just 1x?

Thanks, ranger
 
It won't matter the distance if you can't see the game in the first place!! Spend as much as you can afford, ONCE, you may never need to buy bino's ever again.

But FYI, my rangefinder has a 6x optical piece of glass.
 
Not too many hunters can afford Leica Geovids or Zeiss Victory Rangefinding binoculars.

It is too bad the affordable Bushnell and Leupold rangefinding binocs didn't pan out.

I have been hearing good things about Swarovski 8X Rangefinders. Pricey but probably definitely worth a look....
 
350 Mag said:
Not too many hunters can afford Leica Geovids or Zeiss Victory Rangefinding binoculars.

It is too bad the affordable Bushnell and Leupold rangefinding binocs didn't pan out.

I have been hearing good things about Swarovski 8X Rangefinders. Pricey but probably definitely worth a look....
Click to expand...

I like my Swarovski LRF. It is an 8X and has the same crystal clear glass as the Swaro binoculars. And as far as range capabilities it is one of the best on the market. Will run you just over a grand for price.
 
Get the binoculars first. Get a rangefinder later when you can afford it, but there are other ways of judging distance, and if you aren't confident of your estimate of the distance to a target, classify it as "too far for an ethical shot" and you'll be right about 99% of the time.
 
ranger_dave said:
I am currently working on saving up for and building up my hunting gear. I want to get some form of optics and I can decided between a range finder or a pair of binoculars. I'd rather not carry both to save myself $ and weight in my pack. Now I am more so leaning towards a range finder becasue I like the whole concept of it telling you the distance on what your looking at(the whole point:p) and also seem to be more compact then binoculars. They also seem to be cheaper. The only thing I am not sure of is if range finders have zoom or is it just 1x?

Thanks, ranger
Click to expand...

Most rangefinders are at least 4x optics, and some are 7 or 8x... For hunting in Ontario, I'd get the binos first...

Or if you have $1800 kicking around, you can get the Leica's posted above...:)
 
Binos first is sage advice. Odds are you won't be shooting anything so far away that a rangefinder is necessary but binos will be important every time you go out.
 
I bought a pair of Bausch & Lomb 8X30 Zephyrs in the mid 1970s. They cost almost three weeks salary at that time........ but they were worth every penny!

They finally went gunnysack this fall, after travelling literally thousands and thousands of miles on foot, by boat, truck, skidoo, horseback, in every kind of weather you can imagine.

Whether hunting sheep at 8000 feet, caribou at -40 degrees, and everything in between, they worked and worked great!

Skip a few restaurant meals and drinks, a holiday trip perhaps, and suddenly you will be able to buy the best you cannot afford. :)

Ted
 
Last edited:
I just picked up a set of Bushneel 10X42 Power views at Walmart on sale for 79 bucks and I am quite impressed for the money & I can still afford a range finder take alook at these first
 
Why not? said:
I bought a pair of Bausch & Lomb 8X30 Zephyrs in the mid 1970s. They cost almost three weeks salary at that time........ but they were worth every penny!

They finally went gunnysack this fall, after travelling literally thousands and thousands of miles on foot, by boat, truck, skidoo, horseback, in every kind of weather you can imagine.

Whether hunting sheep at 8000 feet, caribou at -40 degrees, and everything in between, they worked and worked great!

Skip a few restaurant meals and drinks, a holiday trip perhaps, and suddenly you will be able to buy the best you cannot afford. :)

Ted
Click to expand...

Excellent advice Ted! Most people don't understand the true value of GOOD binoculars. I wouldn't head to the field with out mine, I probably spot at least 50% of the game animals I see with my binos first before I would ever see them with the naked eye.

Buy good binos once, and you should get a lot of service from them, just like Ted did!
 
I like the idea of using a rangefinder in place of binos. One less piece of gear to carry. My Leica 1200 is nice and small with 7x magnification. Gives me a good idea of what I am looking at and tells me exactly how far away it is. If I need further magnification after that, I'll get it through the scope.
 
If I need further magnification after that, I'll get it through the scope.
Click to expand...

I will never use a riflescope to glass any object whose identity I have not already verified 100%.To use a riflescope to verify a potential target is irresponsible and unsafe.If I need more magnification than my binoculars,I use a spotting scope,or get closer.
 
Having bought both after being in a similar situation of not knowing which way to go, I'd recommend binos first for a couple reasons.

Firstly, if you are using either a lot, you're eyes will get a lot less fatigued glassing with binos versus squinting like a pirate with a mono range finder.

Secondly, great binos with a decent lens diameter have the wonderful ability to gather light, making either glassing dawn or dusk easier, than the usually smaller lens rangefinders are capable of.

I never believed this until I bought a pair of 8.5x50 Vortex Vipers, the most I could afford. I took them out at night and literally was surprised how much they "lit up" a scene, while the image during the day was incredibly crisp. I've had friends try them at different times and, I'm not bs'ing, the first thing they said after putting them up to their eye was "hey, these are nice binoculars".

They aren't Zeiss or Swaros but are way better than run of the mill Bushnell's I had previous (I realize this isn't really fair to the Bushnell's either - they fill a niche).

Finally, really good quality laser rangefinders are still very expensive but are coming down all the time, where as the bino market seems relatively stable. Waiting to buy later, for new or even used, on the rangefinders might be better advice. This is just my impression, YMMV.
 
stubblejumper said:
I will never use a riflescope to glass any object whose identity I have not already verified 100%.To use a riflescope to verify a potential target is irresponsible and unsafe.If I need more magnification than my binoculars,I use a spotting scope,or get closer.
Click to expand...

x2. My best friend and I had an arguement a couple hunting seasons ago, for that exact reason he was using his scope to check something out. I nearly packed up and went home.

He finally 'got it' when I told him the last thing I wanted him to do was someday be pointing a loaded rifle at either me, or worse his son, in the distance checking to see if we were muley or whitetail.
 
stubblejumper said:
I will never use a riflescope to glass any object whose identity I have not already verified 100%.To use a riflescope to verify a potential target is irresponsible and unsafe.If I need more magnification than my binoculars,I use a spotting scope,or get closer.
Click to expand...

Bullwhip said:
x2. My best friend and I had an arguement a couple hunting seasons ago, for that exact reason he was using his scope to check something out. I nearly packed up and went home.

He finally 'got it' when I told him the last thing I wanted him to do was someday be pointing a loaded rifle at either me, or worse his son, in the distance checking to see if we were muley or whitetail.
Click to expand...

I think you guys are misunderstanding farlsincharge’s post. I agree that I would not use a rifle scope to look at a person either. But if you have glassed the area with a 7x rangefinder (which is not much different than 8X binoculars) and want to take a look at something closer that you already know is not a person what is the big deal. It’s not like he seen some movement in the trees and pointed the rifle at it right off the get go.
 
But if you have glassed the area with a 7x rangefinder (which is not much different than 8X binoculars) and want to take a look at something closer that you already know is not a person what is the big deal.
Click to expand...

Where in his post did he mention that he was already 100% sure of what the object was before using his scope?

It’s not like he seen some movement in the trees and pointed the rifle at it right off the get go.
Click to expand...

So you saw some movement,then used the rangefinder and were still not 100% sure of what you were looking at,but you thought it looked like a deer.In your opinion,is it okay at that point to use the riflescope to try and make a 100% identification?
 
Sorry guys. Where I hunt and shoot, you can tell what something is a long ways off with the naked eye. The rangefinder can easily verify species. I use the scope to get a better look at the rack, or these days choose the biggest doe.

I'm not just swinging a rifle around because I heard a noise "oer there"
 
stubblejumper said:
Where in his post did he mention that he was already 100% sure of what the object was before using his scope?
Click to expand...

Farlsincharge said:
My Leica 1200 is nice and small with 7x magnification. Gives me a good idea of what I am looking at and tells me exactly how far away it is. If I need further magnification after that, I'll get it through the scope.
Click to expand...

So let’s say he saw a deer at 600 yards. Looks at it and decides with the range finder it is a Mule Deer and wants to look at the rack at 20X with the scope to get a better view.

cdnredneck_t3 said:
It’s not like he seen some movement in the trees and pointed the rifle at it right off the get go.
Click to expand...

stubblejumper said:
So you saw some movement,then used the rangefinder and were still not 100% sure of what you were looking at,but you thought it looked like a deer.In your opinion,is it okay at that point to use the riflescope to try and make a 100% identification?
Click to expand...

cdnredneck_t3 said:
I agree that I would not use a rifle scope to look at a person either. But if you have glassed the area with a 7x rangefinder (which is not much different than 8X binoculars) and want to take a look at something closer that you already know is not a person what is the big deal. It’s not like he seen some movement in the trees and pointed the rifle at it right off the get go.
Click to expand...

In what way did what I say sound like what you are making it out to be?

So you are saying that under no circumstances should a rifle scope ever be used to look at something because without physically going over to the exact area where you are looking there is no way to be sure. Sounds like a pain to me. How do you ever shoot. When you see a deer do you check out the area a mile behind him before making the shot? A ricochet can travel a long distance. What if there was someone 1200 yards away over in a creek bottom. Do you want to take that chance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom