ok, nikon scopes, are they worth anything at all?
how do they hold up in the field?
glass quality?
value for the $$ ?
(now i know there are many, MANY, leupold people on this board...BUT i am not asking to compare the 2.  just for info on the Nikon...)
after all...ive seen IOR Valdada scopes that will beat the pants off of Leupold ;)

thanks

I think they are fine. I prefer Leupold's tho. The only complain I have is the eye relief is shorter than the Leupold's. Therfore with any recoiling rifle you would get hit over the eye. That may have been remedied since I bought my 1 Nikon. The optics are good, the warrenty is good. I would buy another if the price was right.

I use Nikons on my Hunting rifles one is a 3-9X40 Monarch and the other is a 3-10x50 Monarch.

Both mine seem to have a narrower field of view as compared to Leupolds and such.  Also the 3-9x40 did not have much adjustment in it, meaning I had to get just right rings to make it sight in.  Both these scopes can peer into the shadows better than my eyes can, at any distance, any time.  If you're going to spend that kind of money, look at others too.

My hunting rifles aren't pretty and thats for a reason.  They get laid on the ground while I climb a tree, and get pulled up by rope and let down.  They get knocked around a little in the process.  I've had the 3-9X40 for 3 yrs and it's withstood my abuse pretty well.

Glass quality excellent.  (IMHO)

People say that the Leupold II series is as good or better than the Nikon Monarch series and the Leupold II are a little cheaper.
My money is on the Nikons

Hope this helps.