Which binoc Nikon Monarch or Leupold Cascades?

[madness522]

I have narrow down my list to two choices. Nikon Monarch and Leupold Cascade.  Both in 8x42.  I have looked thru the Nikons at Bass Pro (they are great for fondling things but are way over priced on most of their stuff) and really thought they were great for the money.  In researching them the Cascades kept coming up and they are in the same $$ ball park.

Which would you choose and why?  Is one better than the other?  And please don't add Zeiss or Lecia to the list they are more than I am going to spend right now.  Thanks!!

[curlis]

Do the Leupold's have a life time warranty? If so that would make my decision for me.

[Steertalker]

Leupold makes the best rifle scopes in my opinion but when it comes to binoculars I would go with the Nikon Monarchs.

The main thing is you need to decide how you are going to be using them.  If you are going out west and planning on "glassing" for hours looking for elk then you need to beg, borrow or steal....do what ever it takes to get the best "glass" you can get....Swarovskis, Zeiss etc!  I know you didn't want to hear that.    

If you are going to be looking through them intermittently say....searching for WT's in the brush or trees or just checking out horns....then the Monarchs or Leupold's will work fine.

The problem with looking through the cheaper glasses for long periods is eye strain.  The glass in the Swarovskis etc are just plain superior to anything else and don't wear your eyes out.

If the Monarchs are the most expensive glass you can afford then go with them.  I do believe they are the best in their class.

Brett

[madness522]

I agree that if I were hunting somewhere wide open and spending lots of hours looking thru them the high dollar binos would be best.  Most of my hunting is done in the woods and the binos would see limited use. Mostly looking in between the shadows searching for deer.  The warrenties are Nikon 25 year limited and Leupold limited lifetime.  To similar to make much of a difference.  

The Nikon's are lighter by about a tenth of a pound.  The only advantage I see is in the exit pupil with the Nikons having a slight edge there.

Decisions, decisions, decisions....

[BillW]

I bought the Nikon Monarch last year and I am not disappointed yet. They were my choice and is my recommendation.
Bill

[Steertalker]

madness522...I would definitely go with the Monarchs then.  They would be perfect for what you are going to use them for.

Brett

[John E.]

The good news is that there is no bad choice at this point.  Having worked selling both (Gander Mtn), I can appreciate the quality of the Leupolds.  However I own the Monarchs.  Good luck.  John E.

[Strutter]

I have the Nikon 10x42 as well.  I have no problem looking through them for extended periods of time.  

Rob

[madness522]

Thanks everyone.  Looks like either way will be a winner.

[Jeff Holchin]

I am going sheep hunting this fall and know I need quality optics because of the amount of glassing required.  I currently have some junk B+L binos.  I've already spent close to $3000 on the tag, a scouting trip and gear, so I don't have another $1000+ for Zeiss or Swaro binos in the budget.  I have seriously considered the Monarch 10x42's in previous years.  Looks like I'll buy them soon, unless a friend locates a used pair of quality binos before September in the same price range.

[Talondale]

How are the Monarchs at low light? and has anyone looked at military surplus binos, especially the European models?

[Pac'em out]

My wife and I both have the Nikons and love them.

[John Nail]

I've had both. I prefer the Leupolds, but there's not a lot of difference. If I were you, I'd buy Leuopold Katmai. World of difference there!

[wmcclendon]

I've never looked through any Leupolds, but I do have some Nikon Monarch ATB's.  I bought the 10x36 because they were a good bit smaller, but I ended up going with the 10x42's because that's what I really wanted.  I actually don't have a reason for the decision other than I had the 42's in mind, but found a good deal on the 36's.  I've tested them both and find them both equally clear and very, very good.  The 36's just run out of light a little earlier than the 42's, but that's to be expected.

BTW...Shameless plug...I'm selling the 36's in the classifieds.

[hill boy]

I have leupold but not the exact model,and I bought the monarchs and a pair of bushnell legends at he same time.The bushnell were a tad heavier but won out on clariy and fogging up issues hands down.And were about the same price as the monarchs.  

[nel]

So I've been told lately, the best glass for the money right now is the Vortex.

Both myself and a buddy have recently bought a pair and are impressed. Their guarantee is pretty good...basicaly you can bring the pieces back to them in a shoebox and get it back pristine...lifetime.

[madness522]

nel, who makes the Vortex?  I'm not familiar with them.

[TSHOOTER]

WHEN YOU GET READY TO BUY, DON'T FORGET TO LOOK AT EAGLEOPTICS.COM.  VERY GOOD PRICES.  YOU CAN SOMETIMES GET GREAT DEALS THERE.  I BOUGHT A 1100 DOLLAR SPOTTING SCOPE FOR 600.  GOOD LUCK

[madness522]

eagleoptics are on my short list but come in about 4th.  I have found several cheaper sites including that big ole auction site.

[wapiti792]

I own both as well...the 8x42 Cascades are my favorite for clarity and are used stand hunting. The 10x42 Monarches are great for elk hunting and seem to be a bit more "rugged".

I can't afford the high dollar glass, and so far those Nikons have keld their own out west with guys that have higher end field glasses. I now have 2 pair after a trade with a fellow tradganger. Don't know why I needed 2 but I do!I'd say look through both brands if you can and see what you think. Each offers a pretty good set of glass for a decent price.