Rangefinders: Leica vs. Swarovski?

[northern skies]

So I bought a Leupold RX-IV this summer, and it's not performing as it was advertised. I'm going to send it back and exchange it for an upgrade.The Swarovski laser guide looks like an excellent model, but the Leica CRF1600 coming out in a month looks great too. Here is what I gather so far about their differences.

-The Swarovski has superior optics. I intend to use either unit as a monocular, so this is a plus.
-They are both waterproof. The leica does not mention nitrogen fill, but the swarovski does. I wonder if that matters.
-They both use CR2 batteries. The swarovski lasts 1000 actuations, the leica lasts 2000.
-The leica ranges in 0.3 seconds, while the swarovski has to charge a capacitor and takes a 1 second delay. I wonder if this could make holding on a target difficult over the delay.
-The leica is wallet sized, the swarovski is about the same size as my RX-IV.
-The Swarovski probably has a longer range. If they both go past 1500m as adverised, they are both adequate.
-The leica has a two-year warranty. The swarovski has a lifetime warranty.
-I hear that the swarovski's reticle is huge and difficult to pinpoint a target with.
-Swarovski is available now, the leica is available mid september..... but I wonder if they are bs'ing me about when they can actually get it in my hands.
-The leica has some gadgets. I found that angle compensation did not prove to be useful in the leupold. It changed my reading by a meter or two. However, the density-compensating functions on the CRF1600 sound very interesting, although I wonder if it will actually tell me the temp/pressure insead of just blindly giving me a solution to some rough approximate trajectory like the leupold does..... I want it to "show its work" so I can plug the numbers into more accurate data.
-Leica is $850. Swarovski is $1100.

Your opinions please!

Thanks!

 

[big boar]

Keep in mind this is just my opinion. Optics don't really matter much in a rangefinder as long as you can see the target, clear& sharp. The reticle must be small enough to hit the target and not interfere with things like branches etc. I'd be against any RF having to hold on target for a long period of time, just me but in the field you can't always hold that still. (Just like offhand shooting.) I've used a Leica quite a bit, my first choice, but bought a Bushnell 1500 as I required it right now and at the time the Leica was unavailble. I do like the Bushnell and have ranged several items well past the 1000yd/metre mark. What I've done to test is take a measurement, past about 500yds, then take a step or two forward/back and see if it registers on the unit. On my unit it does show the increase/decrease. I've used several cheaper modles of RF (mostly Bushnell) and found most were not reliable and gave readings as much as +-50-75yds from the same position. One unit gave 3 different readings from the same position at about 200+yds. I still like the Leica (800 or 900?) and would be my first choice, I really like the small size and it gave excellent results. The Bushnell 1500 is actually excellent, performs much better than I originally expected and the only thing I don't like is the size. It is not that big but is larger than the Leica. I don't use it while I'm hunting but instead use it a lot early in the year to get readings so come season I'm prepared and also to teach myself to judge distances. I kept mine in the car and took various readings just to learn, sort of. I wouldn't break the bank on a RF, they've come down in price a lot last year and a really good product can be had for $500.(?) I'd spend most of my cash on a good binocular (REALLY good), you'll get decades of use and enjoyment from a bino, you only really use a RF occasionally. (Just my opinion.)BB

 

[rar]

when i bought my lieca crf 1200 a year ago it was a toss up between the lieca or the swarovski .difference cost wise was about 300 dollars between the 2.the lieca is smaller in size .farthest ive ranged with mine is just over 1300 yards .seems like the lieca rangest the best when there is cloud cover .ive heard the swarovski doesnt get affected by the sunlight when doing longer distance range estimation .

 

[Cummins4x4]

I compared them both and bought the Leica, its smaller, faster and easier to hold. The swaro has better optics and is more $$ and will range a bit farther.

 

[Mystic Precision]

How far do you want to go?

I shoot beyond 1 mile and got tired of using optical rangefinders. The Swaro is the only range finder that will range beyond a mile - furthest is 2000yds (not rated for that distance but it came up and was GPS verified).

I went through the Leicas, Bushnells, etc, etc and all (from a couple of years back) wouldn't read in bright sunlight on a light background like wild grass or sand. The Swaro would so I bought it.

Most range finders only give max distance readings under ideal conditions and reflective objects. I am hopeful that the new Leica will move the bar up for this brand. Otherwise, think 60 to 70% of max in non favorable conditions.

Swaro has a very large aiming dot but I think this is a positive as it forces you to range a target that big. NO eye safe rangefinder is going to give a reading from an MOA sized object at distance. Most will need a target many times this. Having a fine reticle gives me the impression that I should be able to range a like sized object.

Will not happen.

The LCD on the Swaro also blanks out when facing the sunlight in certain directions. That is a royal pain but I live with it because I did get a reading. I just tilt the rf and read the distance then tilt back to get another reading.

On a cloudy day the SWARO smokes everything else I have tried simply because you get a reading way out there on the first go. Leica can take several attempts which takes a very long time and is ubber frustrating especially if you want to invite it for dinner.

YMMV.

Jerry

 

[Gun5tuff]

I have an older Leica rangefinder. When it's very bright out I'm luck when it reads distances to 300 yards. When it's nearly dark out it unfailingly has given me readings to 1200 yards. I thought my unit was faulty but from the above comments it seems to be a faulty design that Leica does not advertise. It's a great 7 power monocular, however.