Zeiss duralyt vs Nikon monarch

Acm

Well-Known Member
What do you guys think is a better option ? I'm looking at the zeiss 3-12 x50 or a Nikon monarch
 
had both at one time or another, and all ill say is i still have the zeiss duralyt 3/12x50 and a 4.5/14x44 conquest,

mind you i am looking for a scope with a tad more mag and McLeod's have a few in there just now,(fancy a swaro with a tds ret) but being in a part time job and more skint than a tarmac surfers R's im not going to get there anytime soon,

bob.
 
The new monarch x look as if it may give a few scopes a run for there money!! so it should at over £1000:shock:
 
The new monarch x look as if it may give a few scopes a run for there money!! so it should at over £1000:shock:

IMO: not worth the price tag, i find nikons ok but nothing more than that certainly not worth what they are priced at.

bob.
 
I too have the Duralyt and can't fault it. A quality piece of kit at a reasonable price.

I would wager more stalkers here have a Zeiss scope than a Nikon.
 
I agree Bob, if i was spending £1000 it certainly wouldnt be on a monarch. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with them but i would go european for that money!!

Think the duralyt would be the better option out of the two:)
 
Something else to consider is which one will hold it's value better and be easier to sell should you fancy a change.

Zeiss or Nikon...hmmm

What's in a name...quite a lot actually.

fraser
 
I bought from these people http://www.theriflescopestore.com/nimosc.html - 'do the math' a $700 top end Monarch (made in Japan not the Phillipines if that matters) will arrive here with VAT to pay and still cost you less than £600. Now does the Zeiss look so cheap? And can you read the maker's name through the eyepiece? Do you want functionality or bragging rights? The users of this site seem to place more store by the latter!
 
A £600 Zeiss is not exactly bragging rights, but it is a very good scope for the money....As they say horses for courses and each to their own!! Just my tuppence worth!!!
 
I would still have my £600 zeiss budget scope over any of the Nikon range irrespective is if was purchased from the USA and tax free etc. I just don't think they are that good,

I have no reason to brag about anything other than the fact that i have what i have and it was all paid for by hard working wife.

bob.
 
Do you want functionality or bragging rights? The users of this site seem to place more store by the latter!

Not exactly bragging rights to buy a quality scope with quality glass for a reasonable price is it? I couldn't careless who made it. Both scopes are functional I have no doubt but if the choice is there to be made you buy the best you can afford and that would be a Zeiss.

If your opinion is different than mine or anyone elses it's fine, I don't have a problem with it but to label members as above because their choices are different is a little uncalled for.
 
I bought from these people http://www.theriflescopestore.com/nimosc.html - 'do the math' a $700 top end Monarch (made in Japan not the Phillipines if that matters) will arrive here with VAT to pay and still cost you less than £600. Now does the Zeiss look so cheap? And can you read the maker's name through the eyepiece? Do you want functionality or bragging rights? The users of this site seem to place more store by the latter!

I had a Duralyt for a year and a half, I sold it for £50 less than I got it for.

You try that with your Nikon and come back to me.
 
go with the zeiss i have had a couple of nikons ( two made in japan optics very very good.) the one i have now is the 3x9x50 that is not made in japan and the optics are very poor up against my swaro or my zeiss. b.ut thats just my opinion
 
Back
Top