No. They sure want people to THINK it's necessary, though. Like giving an 'example' of the animal being 34 yards out and the 'normal' rangefinder overestimating it (by direct line of sight) to 40 yards, which, in archery, can be quite a difference. But what they conveniently fail to mention is that, in order to have a huge yardage difference like that, YOU HAVE TO BE *63 FEET* UP IN THAT TREE. Who the hell goes 60 feet up???

At normal heights, (i.e 10-15 feet or so) the difference between the angled distance to the animal and the 'true' distance is going to be about 1 yard or less. In other words, there IS no real world difference.

Haven't dealt with them personally, but I know a couple people who bought Leupolds and brought them back because they weren't easy enough to work with.

I have a Bushnell 800 and its great! never had any issues. It states its accurate +/- one yard. I used a wheel measurement tool and dang sure was right on. At 400 yrds it was dead on! would of measured farther but i wont be making any shots over 250 anywaysIve used the scan feature and tracked deer in CadesCove in Tenn. LOL and itwas great at what it indicated, 600 yrds.

Your 800's are probally alot more quality than the 450's I've got I'm not really that impressed with mine like I said in the earlier statement if I had to shoot over 220yds. with mine I would not be able to check the yardage with mine they will not scan over 220yds. and they do not have a real clear view either..........Ted.

Well, im sure its like everything else, the more you spend the better quality and featuresyou get. Im happy with mine and i cant see spending $350+++ for ranging way out of my equipment capabilities

I have a RX-1, at the time it was on sale and the same price as the comparable Bushnell. When I compared them side-by-side, The Loopy was much clearer hands down. The next test was picking outobjects and taking repeated readings. With the loopy I got the same reading every time with the exception of one object, I took a short step back and then got consistent readings. Thebushnell was giving me +/- 1 yard on some objects and some times +/- 2yds. I'm not nocking Bushnell it would certainly get the job done and these are the only two I compared. with the Loopy being on sale for the same price it was a no brainer. Had it for a year now with no problems and no regrets.

mine also on the 450's gives different readings -1 or+1yd or 2 I'm not nocking bushnell either for $150.00 they serve themselves to be ok,but I have never been able to range anything with them over 220yds. I would never take them know where on a hunting trip where I could shoot out to 300to400yds.with a rifle. but for bow and ml they work just fine,when life gives me the opportunity I will upgrade to a better pair.........Ted

Of those mentioned get the Nikon. IME it is the best below Lieca which are what I suggest for LRF's. After owning &/or using several othersLieca are the most reliable, simple to use, battery consumption, optics and Red LED readout (god sent, should be on all LRF's). If you do some looking you might be able to find the Lieca scan model 900 or 1200 on clearance as they are being replaced by the CRF models of these.

As far as the Leuy RXII, to complicated IMHO. I like push the button and get the range. Arc/Ballistics,etc on a LRF??? K.I.S.S. theory applies!

I would love to get a pair of the leica 1200's they have them for $429.00 @ www.cameralandny.com I bought a 3.5x10x50 zeiss conquest from doug at camera land excellent people to do buisness with,good prices fast shipping and there customer service is outstanding.......Ted

I shopped around this fall andreally likedthe Bushnell Yardage Pro Scout. I compaired them to Nikons, Leupolds, and other Bushnell models.

I ended up ordering a demo model from Natchezss.com for $160.00,it looks and works great.

I have the Leica 800, and am real happy with it.