is either of these scopes any better than the other ?

rebs · April 11, 2015, 02:32 PM

How does the Nikon Prostaff 5 compare to the Nikon Monarch 3 ?

wogpotter · April 11, 2015, 03:25 PM

I have a monarch & its a very good scope. What features are you trying to compare?

rebs · April 11, 2015, 05:26 PM

I want to compare brightness and clarity

wogpotter · April 12, 2015, 08:27 AM

Brightness is going to be a combination of objective diameter, magnification & lighting.

I've never found my monarch 2~8X32 lacking even at the end of the day under heavy tree cover.

Sharpness will resolve the lines on a target at 8X from 100yds. I can't imagine needing more than that.

rebs · April 12, 2015, 08:44 AM

I guess what I need to know also is the monarch worth the extra money over the prostaff 5 ?

wogpotter · April 12, 2015, 10:12 AM

Yes.
In optics you get what you pay for.

SSA · April 12, 2015, 12:23 PM

I just looked at these on Optics Planet. For $399.95 you can take your pick between 3 different Monarch 3's, a Prostaff 5, or a Prostaff 7.
I guess you just pick the size, reticle, and turrets you want. Some have rebates.

Wendyj · April 12, 2015, 08:58 PM

I saw prostaff 7 in 30 mm tube today. Loved the thicker crosshairs with super fine in the middle. 4x12. I have a prostaff 5 with mil- dot reticle and my crosshairs are too thick for precision shooting as the crosshairs are thicker than the dime sized target I'm trying to acquire. My husband picked up a bushnell elite 4200 2x10 with great crosshairs and the rain guard lenses. Light clarification not 10 minutes of difference between Nikon and Bushnell. We have a few Leupold VXIII's which are good scopes but for double the money the quality isn't much difference. Elite 4200 as good if not better. I guess our favorite is the older Zeiss conquest that 5 years ago was $499.00. The newer divari doesn't come close. Got to get eyes checked as it seems no matter what I do with the ocular adjuster lately it seems crosshairs are clear and target somewhat blurry. Not fun getting older but beats the alternative.

rebs · April 15, 2015, 06:48 AM

Thank you for all the replies. As for the clear cross hairs and blurry target you may find a scope with adjustable objective lens would help.

TxWheels · April 15, 2015, 09:48 AM

I have a 3-9x40 Prostaff on one rifle and a 3-9x40 Monarch on another one and I quite frankly can't find any difference at all between the two.

pete2 · April 15, 2015, 06:43 PM

The Monarch is their upper end but you may not be able to tell the difference except under low light conditions. During broad daylight all current scopes look real good but if you compare them late in the evening at the same power settings you should see a difference, I can between a Leupold VX II and a VXIII
the VXIII was much brighter even tho it has a smaller front lens. A compact Burris looked just as good as the VARI-X II, Burris also had smaller front lense. The real difference is the lenses and the better coatings used n the high end scopes. This from my experience with 3 different rifles one evening when I was running out of daylight.

Wendyj · April 15, 2015, 07:26 PM

I think your correct Rebs. Anything over 9 or 10 power gets worse. My 2.5 x 10 doesn't do this. It's first 14 power I've owned without adjustable objective. My 8-22 nightforce i owned when they first hit the U.S. was probably the nicest scope I'd ever owned. $700.00 at the time. Way out of my limits now.

April 11, 2015, 02:32 PM	#1
rebs Senior Member Join Date: January 10, 2012 Posts: 3,881	is either of these scopes any better than the other ? How does the Nikon Prostaff 5 compare to the Nikon Monarch 3 ?

April 11, 2015, 03:25 PM	#2
wogpotter Senior Member Join Date: September 27, 2004 Posts: 4,811	I have a monarch & its a very good scope. What features are you trying to compare? __________________ Allan Quatermain: “Automatic rifles. Who in God's name has automatic rifles”? Elderly Hunter: “That's dashed unsporting. Probably Belgium.”

April 12, 2015, 08:27 AM	#4
wogpotter Senior Member Join Date: September 27, 2004 Posts: 4,811	Brightness is going to be a combination of objective diameter, magnification & lighting. I've never found my monarch 2~8X32 lacking even at the end of the day under heavy tree cover. Sharpness will resolve the lines on a target at 8X from 100yds. I can't imagine needing more than that. __________________ Allan Quatermain: “Automatic rifles. Who in God's name has automatic rifles”? Elderly Hunter: “That's dashed unsporting. Probably Belgium.”

April 12, 2015, 10:12 AM	#6
wogpotter Senior Member Join Date: September 27, 2004 Posts: 4,811	Yes. In optics you get what you pay for. __________________ Allan Quatermain: “Automatic rifles. Who in God's name has automatic rifles”? Elderly Hunter: “That's dashed unsporting. Probably Belgium.”

April 15, 2015, 09:48 AM	#10
TxWheels Member Join Date: April 13, 2015 Location: North Texas Posts: 34	I have a 3-9x40 Prostaff on one rifle and a 3-9x40 Monarch on another one and I quite frankly can't find any difference at all between the two. __________________ If I don't answer the phone, I'm probably in the Senate taking a POTUS and wiping my Congress.

April 11, 2015, 05:26 PM	#3
rebs Senior Member Join Date: January 10, 2012 Posts: 3,881	I want to compare brightness and clarity

April 12, 2015, 08:44 AM	#5
rebs Senior Member Join Date: January 10, 2012 Posts: 3,881	I guess what I need to know also is the monarch worth the extra money over the prostaff 5 ?

April 12, 2015, 12:23 PM	#7
SSA Senior Member Join Date: August 1, 2010 Posts: 641	I just looked at these on Optics Planet. For $399.95 you can take your pick between 3 different Monarch 3's, a Prostaff 5, or a Prostaff 7. I guess you just pick the size, reticle, and turrets you want. Some have rebates.

April 12, 2015, 08:58 PM	#8
Wendyj Senior Member Join Date: April 3, 2015 Location: North Georgia Posts: 1,372	I saw prostaff 7 in 30 mm tube today. Loved the thicker crosshairs with super fine in the middle. 4x12. I have a prostaff 5 with mil- dot reticle and my crosshairs are too thick for precision shooting as the crosshairs are thicker than the dime sized target I'm trying to acquire. My husband picked up a bushnell elite 4200 2x10 with great crosshairs and the rain guard lenses. Light clarification not 10 minutes of difference between Nikon and Bushnell. We have a few Leupold VXIII's which are good scopes but for double the money the quality isn't much difference. Elite 4200 as good if not better. I guess our favorite is the older Zeiss conquest that 5 years ago was $499.00. The newer divari doesn't come close. Got to get eyes checked as it seems no matter what I do with the ocular adjuster lately it seems crosshairs are clear and target somewhat blurry. Not fun getting older but beats the alternative.

April 15, 2015, 06:48 AM	#9
rebs Senior Member Join Date: January 10, 2012 Posts: 3,881	Thank you for all the replies. As for the clear cross hairs and blurry target you may find a scope with adjustable objective lens would help.

April 15, 2015, 06:43 PM	#11
pete2 Senior Member Join Date: May 15, 2012 Location: Texas Posts: 2,566	The Monarch is their upper end but you may not be able to tell the difference except under low light conditions. During broad daylight all current scopes look real good but if you compare them late in the evening at the same power settings you should see a difference, I can between a Leupold VX II and a VXIII the VXIII was much brighter even tho it has a smaller front lens. A compact Burris looked just as good as the VARI-X II, Burris also had smaller front lense. The real difference is the lenses and the better coatings used n the high end scopes. This from my experience with 3 different rifles one evening when I was running out of daylight.

April 15, 2015, 07:26 PM	#12
Wendyj Senior Member Join Date: April 3, 2015 Location: North Georgia Posts: 1,372	I think your correct Rebs. Anything over 9 or 10 power gets worse. My 2.5 x 10 doesn't do this. It's first 14 power I've owned without adjustable objective. My 8-22 nightforce i owned when they first hit the U.S. was probably the nicest scope I'd ever owned. $700.00 at the time. Way out of my limits now.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search