How does the Monarch compare to the VX3 ???

The best thing to do is go to a sporting goods store that has both and compare with your eyes. Then you will have no doubt. The Leupold's have great eye relief and one of the best warranties in the business, but Nikon's warranty is good too. Given the choices, I would take a Leupold over a Nikon any day, but others here like Nikon's. Good luck.

Both companies make excellent optical instruments. One company primarily makes optical instruments designed for use as cameras. The other company primarily makes optical instruments designed as optical gun sights.

Pay your money and take your choice. As for me, I never plan to buy a camera made by Leupold.

I don't think it makes much difference whether the company is in multiple lines of business with its glass. For example, Swarovski makes some beautiful chrystal candy bowls and jewelry, but that doesn't mean that its rifle scopes aren't good because it doesn't specialize like Leupold does.

I have Monarch and VX3 scopes. I can't tell the difference in the optics. They are both very good. I think the primary advantage the Leupold has is the service and warranty. Other than that, I just buy based on the features I am looking for.

tossup - which one can you buy cheaper

I prefer the Leupold. My eyes like it better. Best thing to do is go to your local sporting goods store and look through them both. Buy which ever one your eyes like.

Won't be buying no leaded glass crystal from Leupold, neither.

+ 1 on ZZMag at sporting store.

On side by side be sure to took into the shadows at a long distance not just some object in store. Look for definition such as numbers on a a license plate or the bark on a tree.

That should have been... ++1 on 338ZMAG

I would buy the Leupold being a USA citizen and the scopes being fairly equal. I cannot tell a lot if any difference between these scopes. I also have not checked on the comparative weights although Leupold's have a tendency to be light in weight as compared to other offerings and of course the warranty.
With our economy being a bit in the dumps these days I would prefer my money supporting American workers. I realize some components of the Leupolds are out sourced off shore, they still make some compnoents and assemble them in the USA, Fix them if required in the USA and employee people.
We can keep our people working or not support them and then when they are laid off, Obummer can tax us more and we can support these laid off people via government social programs


EZ

Having made several rough hunts, and a lot of heavy recoil rifle shooting, I have yet to send in a Leupold or Zeiss Conquest for repair, and they are on all my hard kickers now. I have four Nikon MOnarchs, two have been sent in for repair. I'd say optically the Nikon may be better- on a lighter caliber. Durability wise, Leupold, again this is just my experience, but it takes in a lot of territory. I also have probably owned five times as many Leupolds as Nikon as well.

Optically, the Nikon is the better scope. I haven't had any issues with Nikon reliability either. VX3's are simply overpriced for the result. Okay, you got a good warranty, and if that comforts you then fine. But optically, the Monarch is the better scope. Plain and simple. The Leupold scopes aren't bad, but you are paying too much for the rep and name. Getting too little performance for the money.

I am a USA citizen, but Leupold isn't even USA components. So who cares? Free people buy what they want, and what they want is the most performance for the money. Buy Nikon and don't look back. Leupold should put up and quit living on reputations.

quote:

Originally posted by mailmanmark:
How does the Monarch compare to the VX3 ???

It is substandard in most respects.

Terry

i like both i have about 5 nikon monarchs and a couple of buckmasters like them all have looked at the leos but the priced when compared scope sizes versus price i always tend to get the nikon . are the leupolds made in U.S.A ? nikons are made in the phillipines not saying that is a bad thing but i do try to buy U.S products first

Leupolds are made in Oregon. I believe they source their optics from Japan. They make a great majority of their components. It would be pre mature to say they make all their internal components. I have seen pictures of their facility. It is fairly impressive. If Nikons are made in the Phillipines. I suspect they pay their labor about 1/10 what we pay workers in the USA.
Probably has quite a bit to do with the price point brought into the equation.

I think the Sightron SII Big Sky is optically a better scope than either one - and I have all three.

Price right in between the other two.

Real eye relief...not what's advertised...I have both scopes and Leupold has far more eye relief on the same power setting vs the Nikon....check it for yourself you will be surprised.

quote:

Originally posted by Esldude:
Optically, the Nikon is the better scope. I haven't had any issues with Nikon reliability either. VX3's are simply overpriced for the result. Okay, you got a good warranty, and if that comforts you then fine. But optically, the Monarch is the better scope. Plain and simple. The Leupold scopes aren't bad, but you are paying too much for the rep and name. Getting too little performance for the money.

I am a USA citizen, but Leupold isn't even USA components. So who cares? Free people buy what they want, and what they want is the most performance for the money. Buy Nikon and don't look back. Leupold should put up and quit living on reputations.

I agree with that, and also what Ted Thorn posted, the Leupies do have better eye relief.

Also, Leupold has redesigned the VX III and I have not looked through one of them, I have several of the '09 and prior VX III's--Nikon much better optically, and a better fast focus eyepiece by miles.

Nikon refused any backing of their range finder when the 1 year warranty was up for only three (3) days - they treated me poorly. Nikon sucks as a company. Their scope may have a better warranty than their range finder, but I despise their management.

Leupold stands behind their product with no hassle.

Nikon sucks.

quote:

Originally posted by Nanook 450:
Nikon refused any backing of their range finder when the 1 year warranty was up for only three (3) days - they treated me poorly. Nikon sucks as a company. Their scope may have a better warranty than their range finder, but I despise their management.

Leupold stands behind their product with no hassle.

Nikon sucks.

That is good to know, and bad to hear! I had good service with Nikon with the one issue I had, my partner drove over one of my Monarchs, and it went geeky, they had it back to me in 10 days, repaired and flawless.
I hate it if they have changed, what the did to you does suck and was just stupid!

The optics field changes so fast, in all companies, I have given up trying to decide even for myself which scope brand/model is best.

Nikon Monarchs, for instance were first made in Japan, then in Korea, then in the Phillipines, and I have heard recently that now at least some of them are being made in Singapore (that last reported move may or may not prove to be correct).

Leupold's line of scopes has also changed many times, as have Weaver's and others.

Heck, in the early '70s one of the senior Redfield optical design men left and went to work with Leupold...and helped it grow into a really, really popular line, while Redfield declined. Now Leupold is MAKING Redfield scopes in Beaverton!

My rule of thumb in all sports optics is to look through the exact scope or binocular set I am considering buying, before I lay down any cash, if I can.

I have found that if I put half a dozen of the same make & model of scope side by side and look through them, a couple will usually have definitely better optics than the others, although the same make, brand, model and price.

So, if I find one of them that really works for me, at a price I like, I buy that exact one...the very one I was looking through, not another one in an unopened, sealed box.

If I am comparing three or four makes and models, that may mean looking through 20-24 different scopes. But fairly often the one which prooves to be the best may be a make/model I didn't really expect to do that well, and is maybe $100 cheaper than some of those it beat out.

Less convenient; no way to blame anyone except me if they don't pan out in the long run; sometimes mildly irritating to the store owner(s) who just want to move merchandise.

Still, Works For Me.

You know one more impressive thing about the Nikons is quality control. I have several Monarchs, one made in the Philipines, two from Japan, and three from Thailand. Surprisingly, there isn't any discernible optical difference in any of them. Monarchs haven't been made in Korea or Singapore.

VX3s have of course been replaced by a newer design. And so have the Monarchs. One nice change in the Monarch line is constant eye relief at all powers. Leupolds often have great eye relief, at lower magnification. They also have one of the largest changes in eye relief with changes in magnification. That isn't a positive quality in a riflescope.