Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

I'm in the process of buying a scope for one of my rifles. I don't want to spend over $500.00. I've narrowed my choices to the Nikon Monarch 3-12x42 or 4-16x42or the Burris Fullfield II 4.5-14x42. Does anyone hunt with either of these? Any opinions on the two? To me, the clarity is just about identical in the two.

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

I have a Nikon Buckmaster on a Ruger .270 and it is super clear and a great scope! I absolutely love it. I would have loved to gotten a monarch, but couldn't afford it at the time. I really like the nikon scopes and I am very impressed with them and have had nothhing but good experiences with them.

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

Of the two you mentioned, the Nikon Monarch would be the hands down winner...IMO of course.

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

I dont think you can go wrong with either of those scopes. When you pay that kind of money you get what you pay for:). I have both burris and nikon scopes that are one step down from the ones you are looking at and I personally like the burris a bit better with the crosshairs the way they are.

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

I have the Nikon Monarch 4-16 x 42 SF ... and the Nikon Monarch 5-20 x 44 SF and I really love them both. I also have a Monarch handgun scope and 5 Nikon Buckmasters of various sizes.

I really like the Nikon over the Burris FF II. It is a little better quality than the Burris IMHO.

I know both have a good warranty program, as I have had to utilize them both, but have not had a Hiccup with either.

I just really like the Nikons, and have made the move to almost all Nikons, save maybe 5 - 6 scopes of other Manufacturers.

God Bless

MET

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

I just went through this with a new rifle and the decision was easy for me having previous experience with burris bino's (they broke several times, however they replaced them every time). After reading the reviews I went with the Nikon Monarch 5-20X44....I like the scope but I would not recommend the bullet dropreticle if you plan on doing much bench shooting, it would be a good large game reticle at long yardages, I have found that the reticle covers too much of the target at300yds and out (paper).....

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

I have two 3-9X40 FF-II's and could not be happier with them. One sits on a 338RUM and the other on a .270. Neither of the two have given me any problems what so ever.

Having said this.........
If you are comparing a Burris to a Nikon monarch you should really be comparing a Burris Signature select instead of the FF-II. Even though Burris claims that both the monarch and the FF-II both have 95% total light transmission.

The signature select 3-12X44 would be my choice over the Monarch.

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

X 2 . . .never tried Burris, but I love my Monarch to death

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

Once you decide what you want, give e-bay a look. I bought the Nikon Monarch on e-bay from an outdoor store that beat all the other online dealers by quite a bit. Be sure to check out the stores background of course,I bought mine from baileys outdoos store.....

RE: Nikon or Burris? Your opinions
 

I've never owned a Burris but both the Nikons that I use have been very dependable. I hunt during some very cold weather and the Nikon has always performed in the cold climate.