Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33

Thread: Leica CRF 900 or 1200?

  1. #1
    Member BrettAKSCI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,624

    Default Leica CRF 900 or 1200?

    I'm looking to get a Leica CRF, but not sure about 900 or 1200? Any thoughts? I can get the 900 for $170 less. Money is less a concern than getting the correct gear. That said if there's no practical difference I have no problem with saving some money.

    Brett

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brett Adam Barringer View Post
    I'm looking to get a Leica CRF, but not sure about 900 or 1200? Any thoughts? I can get the 900 for $170 less. Money is less a concern than getting the correct gear. That said if there's no practical difference I have no problem with saving some money.

    Brett
    If you can get the 900 for that much cheaper I'd go that route. I picked up the 1200 for $499 form Doug at cameraland as it was only $50 more than the $900 at the time kinda making it a no brainer, but if its that much cheaper I'd go with the 900. How often are you gonna need that extra 300 yrds realistically? I know I won't even though I do have the 1200.

  3. #3

    Default

    I see no reason to select the 1200 over the 900. I use to own a 1200, sold it and bought a 900 a few months later. Get the 900 and use that extra $170 for something else.

  4. #4
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alaska_Lanche View Post
    If you can get the 900 for that much cheaper I'd go that route. I picked up the 1200 for $499 form Doug at cameraland as it was only $50 more than the $900 at the time kinda making it a no brainer, but if its that much cheaper I'd go with the 900. How often are you gonna need that extra 300 yrds realistically? I know I won't even though I do have the 1200.
    The only practical bennefit of the 1200 over the 9 is for use when stalking an animal. Say it is 1150 yards away and you can see it from your vantage point and it is bedded. You plan your stalk and there is a rock 975 yards away between you and the sheep w/ a nice approach where you can stay out of view the whole way. You can now set off on your stalk knowing that as long as the sheep is still bedded you should end up ~175 yards from the sheep when you make the rock so if as you get there the sheep becomes alarmed and stands up ready to take off you can fire immediately with confidence. Now is that a likely enough scenario to justify the $170? IMHO probably not

  5. #5
    Member BrettAKSCI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,624

    Default

    Thanks for the input. I figured ranging for a stalk was about it for difference in function. For people that own a 900 or 1200: What's your affective ranging distance with them? I realize weather conditions dictate a lot, but will the 900 consistently do 900 in favorable conditions? Will the 1200 consistently do 1200 in favorable conditions?

    Brett

  6. #6

    Default

    With my 1200, the furthest I ever got it to read was 1168 yards, pretty darn close to 1200 IMO. I haven't really tested my 900 yet but plan on doing just that this coming weekend.

  7. #7
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    Funny i have used the 1200 in the field and the furthest I tried it was 768 yards. i know it would have worked well beyond that but I didin't feel like backing up from the bear were stalking. <grin>

  8. #8

    Default

    I got 1258 once with my 1200!!!

  9. #9
    Member BrettAKSCI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,624

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alaska_Lanche View Post
    I got 1258 once with my 1200!!!
    Show off!!!!

  10. #10
    Member AK Wonderer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Brett,

    Where are you finding the 900 for $170 less? I'm in the market as well.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    Beyond about 600 yards distance information isn't very helpful to me. I have a laser that goes out further but all it really needs to say is "too far". A laser that reads 1200 and my laser that doesn't acquire at that range are equal for my use. They both indicate that I need to get closer.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AK Wonderer View Post
    Brett,

    Where are you finding the 900 for $170 less? I'm in the market as well.
    The cheapest you will find the Leica CRF 900 is at Camerland for $429. Trust me, I searched all over the internet and could not find one for less than that.

  13. #13
    Member BrettAKSCI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,624

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AkHunter45 View Post
    The cheapest you will find the Leica CRF 900 is at Camerland for $429. Trust me, I searched all over the internet and could not find one for less than that.
    Prety much. I've seen a few on auction websites that may end up going for $400-430 or may not. You never know.

    Brett

  14. #14
    Forum Sponsor
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,430

    Default

    These two units are identical with the exception of the distance difference. We still have new CRF 900's at $429.99, http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/s...ge=leicacrf900
    If there is anything I can answer for you or assist you with please let me know.
    Thanks and have a great day,
    Doug
    Camera Land
    1-866-9-optics
    1-516-217-1000
    gr8fuldoug@aol.com

  15. #15
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Pid View Post
    Beyond about 600 yards distance information isn't very helpful to me. I have a laser that goes out further but all it really needs to say is "too far". A laser that reads 1200 and my laser that doesn't acquire at that range are equal for my use. They both indicate that I need to get closer.
    Would it ever be useful to be able to range an animal at, say, 1,200 yards, and then a ridgeline in the same general direction at, say, 900 yards, to determine that you can attempt to get within shooting range of the 1200-yards-away sheep/bear/moose/etc.. by stalking to that closer area of cover without say, descending into an area within close, direct vision of the intended victim?

    Stated more generally, would it be useful to have a longer-range range-finder to be able to determine the diference in distance between two different forward spots so that you can then determine whether you should proceed to that closer forward spot to take a shot, or whether you would have to try some flanking maneuver on the sheep/bear//etc.. to be likely to get into range without spooking the game?

    Or would that not likely be useful?

    Note: I mean this merely as a question, as I have no idea, and I buying my first rangefinder soon.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    I prefer to stalk with my eyes and use a laser to improve shot accuracy. My goal is to get as close as I can. Only then does the ranging become important. In unfamiliar territory the specific shot distance is hard to judge. An animal that's 500-600 yards can look like they're at 150 yards. Knowledge of the precise distance allows a better shot. Distances beyond my responsible shot range are unimportant. Too far is too far. Not to say I'd decide to take a shot at 500-600 yards, but I'll never take a shot outside of that.

    Holding the rangefinder still enough to hit a target at 3/4 of a mile is impractical if not impossible and in any event unnecessary. At least to me.

  17. #17
    Member doogiehauz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    elmendorf AFB AK
    Posts
    275

    Smile

    bought my leica 1200 for 500$ at camera land as well. I mean leica's a great product and if i can save 100$ off the retail why not? i love mine its awesome and i think it was only 70$ more than the 900. In the end I like to know my money was well spent and in 20 years are you going to care weather you spent 170$ on an item? I go with quality and if something has the potential to better for a given situation I'll get it to have as much edge as i can. I buy the best optics that money can buy and know that i will not have to upgrade. If i put together all my range finders/binoculars i bought before good glass i could have bought the best if i would have saved a couple seasons. It only hurts once to buy good gear! Good luck on you choices both are good ones!

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    Here's a serious question. Do any of your really notice a difference in optics with the various compact rangefinders?

  19. #19
    Member BrettAKSCI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,624

    Default

    Good lord yes. And especially in low light conditions. If you've ever tried to range a whitetail at last light only to not even be able to see it through your crappy bushnell range finder you'll know what I mean! Another big plus is red digital reads on the range finder. In low light the black ones just don't show up. So in other words your range finder works, but you can't read it!

    Brett

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    I'm not arguing. I'm genuinely curious what drives guys to buy one or another. I have a Leica. I was given a Leupold. I later tried, liked, and bought a Bushnell. The Leupold was awful. The Leica works well. The Bushnell is my favorite. I think optics are equal on all three. I'm not sure I believe one brand or another makes a guy a superior hunter. It just comes down to what you like.

    I hunted successfully for a long time without a rangefinder. About half the time I still do.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •