|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 18, 2007, 09:30 PM | #1 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 31, 2004
Location: The Toll Road State, U.S.A.
Posts: 12,451
|
Nikon Prostaff vs. Nikon Buckmaster
Can anyone verify or deny, for positive, for certain, that the Prostaff is or isn't the exact same thing as the Buckmaster (in the 3-9x40 version), without the premium to give the Buckmaster people their cut, as has been alleged on the intarweb? The Buckmaster advertises that is has 92% light transmission, but the Prostaff does not make that claim. I know that this is not conclusory, but I'll throw it out there.
I grabbed a Prostaff 3-9x40mm with BDC reticle today for my backup hunter, since my Tasco World Class crapped out, so I'm curious now. |
November 19, 2007, 08:35 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: NKY
Posts: 12,463
|
I just bought a Nikon Team Primos (which is a Monarch with more light transmission) and spent a lot of time looking through various scopes. As far as the Buckmaster, it transmits 92% of light and the Prostaff transmits 90%. While the scopes might be related I would guess that the lens are the real difference between the two making them closely related but overall different scopes.
__________________
"He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson |
November 19, 2007, 08:53 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 27, 2006
Location: ponca city ok
Posts: 746
|
I picked the 3x9x40 buckmaster and i love it is very clear and works good on my 270 win
__________________
CVA Kodiak Magnum .50 cal Marlin 981T 22LR Bolt Action Remington 770 Bolt Action 270 Thompson Center Encore 243 |
November 19, 2007, 09:31 PM | #4 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: March 24, 2005
Location: Steubenville, OH
Posts: 4,446
|
When I bought my ProStaff a couple of years ago, I fussed & fretted in the store, looking through the ProStaff, then the Buckmaster, then the Monarch, then back through 'em again. I also compared 'em with a Leupold (can't remember which model), and folks, I gotta tell ya; I couldn't detect a darned bit of difference with the naked eye, either with light transmission, clarity, or vignetting (sp?)
I'm sure there are differences detectable with sophisticated instruments, but I won't be using those instruments in the field, or on the range. I kinda think it's similar to the Great Megapixel Wars in today's digital cameras. 10 or 12 meg, it's all overkill detectable only to the most exacting, demanding professionals. The main thing is I can see clearly through it, and the little holes always appear exactly where the lines cross .
__________________
TFL Members are ambassadors to the world for firearm owners. What kind of ambassador does your post make you? I train in earnest, to do the things that I pray in earnest, I'll never have to do. --Capt. Charlie |
November 23, 2007, 03:37 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 11, 2002
Location: ALABAMA
Posts: 1,472
|
I have a 3-9x40 BDC Prostaff as well as a 4.5-14x40SFMD Buckmaster (that I got through a buddy @ Academy for $180). Both are just as good for my uses as my VXIII Leupold. I don't really see any differences in the PS and BM.
__________________
TROTAC.com |
November 25, 2007, 09:50 PM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: July 8, 2007
Posts: 42
|
The Buckmaster I saw was a hand-turn. Maybe it was just that model, but I didn't want to pay an extra $200 just so I could leave a penny behind.
|
|
|