Originally Posted by Damenc

I didn't miss your point at all, I think you missed mine. A budget is a budget is a budget. If we pay a "little" more for everything that word would not exist. Also, it's barely a "little" more as I've already stated in previous post, big difference between $75 and $250 more, that's the next one up where in price range. If it was under $150 then I would consider it of course, not when its more then twice the price.

I spent my money on a decent bow plus all the hunting gear, this was not even on my list but I thought for the price. There's always better stuff out there and more money to spend, it's where each individual draw the line is what counts. You suggested Nikon, why not get the Leica one? it's better, and three times the price. You have your budget, I have mine. Don't write it off so quickly because it's "cheaper", have you taken this particular unit out in the field and actually hunted with it? no, so how can you base your judgement just on price? Ya, it's not a brand name, whoopie doo, I can give you a lot of generic name products I have that works just as good if not better and lasted.

Who knows, this may work fine for me, really how better do I need it to be. If it gives me the distance, that's all that matters. Like I said, it may not work out but so far it's been good on the range and that's all I'm saying. I've used "lower" end products and the past and yes some are not worth it but the handful do what it says it does at a fraction of the price, works for me.