Range Finders ?
- Thread starter Eggbert
- Start date
Everyone has an opinion so here's mine.
If you are shooting, with a rifle, at any distance less than about 200 yards you don't need a rangefinder. Even if you sight in at 100 yards you won't experience enough drop, in a hunting situation, where you need to know if it's 150, 175 or 200 yards to the target.
If you bow hunt from a stand then using a rangefinder initially to figure out how far it is to "that bush, that rock, that opening etc" is almost vital, but with a bow the difference between your 15 yard pin and 30 yard pin IS significant.
In a dense situation, from a stand, a rangefinder will not "look through" leaves, foliage, branches etc - it bounces off whatever the beam hits, so you would get varying readings at best - and if it's that dense you wouldn't see the deer (or whatever) at any sort of distance anyhow.
The golf rangefinders are pretty much the same technology - they all "measure distance" and would certainly work to mark the distance to "some object".
Where a range finder is useful is if you are shooting across open fields or from one hilltop to another, because most of us "suck" at judging how far and often "over estimate" by as much as 50 or 100% to actual distance.
If you are shooting, with a rifle, at any distance less than about 200 yards you don't need a rangefinder. Even if you sight in at 100 yards you won't experience enough drop, in a hunting situation, where you need to know if it's 150, 175 or 200 yards to the target.
If you bow hunt from a stand then using a rangefinder initially to figure out how far it is to "that bush, that rock, that opening etc" is almost vital, but with a bow the difference between your 15 yard pin and 30 yard pin IS significant.
In a dense situation, from a stand, a rangefinder will not "look through" leaves, foliage, branches etc - it bounces off whatever the beam hits, so you would get varying readings at best - and if it's that dense you wouldn't see the deer (or whatever) at any sort of distance anyhow.
The golf rangefinders are pretty much the same technology - they all "measure distance" and would certainly work to mark the distance to "some object".
Where a range finder is useful is if you are shooting across open fields or from one hilltop to another, because most of us "suck" at judging how far and often "over estimate" by as much as 50 or 100% to actual distance.
Galamb is right--most of us suck at judging distances across clear cuts or long shorelines.
I have a Nikon measures out to 450 meters--cost me a couple of hundred several years ago-- well worth it and something fun to play with. I think it's 8-power and takes some getting used to cause it's kinda small and hard to sometimes focus to get a good reading. Impossible for me to use with gloves on.
I also have a cheap Busnell which I consider mostly junk but would prolly work for bow hunting.
I have a Nikon measures out to 450 meters--cost me a couple of hundred several years ago-- well worth it and something fun to play with. I think it's 8-power and takes some getting used to cause it's kinda small and hard to sometimes focus to get a good reading. Impossible for me to use with gloves on.
I also have a cheap Busnell which I consider mostly junk but would prolly work for bow hunting.
I carry a Bushnell rangefinder. Find it useful ranging across canyons or from hillside to hillside as I find it extremely difficult to judge in those situations. To further support the opinion of the above cgn'ers, they are correct in saying that under 200 yards with an ideal setup, they're not an absolute when rifle hunting.
Leupold 750 tbr or rbt something here. Very useful for bow hunting. Very useful outside the 300 yard range. Having said that, even though it's supposed to be good to 750 yards it sucks over 500 amd even 400 has to be very reflective.
