Nikon Laser Prostaff 440   Edward Frank
  Nov 20, 2006 13:01 PST 


Do any of you have a Nikon Laser Prostaff 440 rangefinder? How wee
does it work? Are there any problems with it? I see that it only
measures down to 10.5 yards, and uses cr2 batteries rather than AA
rechargables like some manufacturers equipment uses.

Ed Frank
RE: Nikon Laser Prostaff 440   Will Blozan
  Nov 20, 2006 15:02 PST 


I have one and love it. I have left my Bushnell in the office since the day
I bought it. I find its narrow beam exceptionally tight and accurate. Jess
and I tested it against a tape and it was 6 inches or less off. I have not
tested it against a tree but the ones I have measured that have been climbed
have been within 10-12 inches of a tape drop of ~170'.

I purchased mine thru and it was delivered to the door for
less than $200.

RE: Nikon Laser Prostaff 440   Robert Leverett
  Nov 21, 2006 04:10 PST 


   I've posted a number of e-mails evaluating the Nikon Prostaff 440.
I've sent some spreadsheet information on its accuracy versus the
Bushnell 800 nad the new TruPulse 200. I swear by the Prostaff 440. So
does Will Blozan. So does Gary Beluzo. Yes,it measures down to only 10.5
yards, but shoots through small openings to hit distant twigs. It is a
very good buy.

More on the Nikon Prostaff 440    Robert Leverett
   Nov 21, 2006 07:35 PST 


   Since around 1997, I've owned a number of lasers and clinometers of
several brands. The early Bushnells were very good. However, like
virtually every modern gadget, there comes the explosion of extra
features, cutsie designs to satisfy the dilettantes and quality starts
to go down the toilet. When my old Bushnell 800 dies I will probably
gold plate it. It is accurate to under a foot. My Nikon Prostaff 440 is
also very accurate - perhaps to a foot and shoots through tiny openings
in the canopy. It is my favorite laser. I'd be lost without it.

   I own a pricey TruPulse 200, which is accurate to under a foot -
probably under half-a-foot. However, it is virtually useless in a dense,
closed-canopy forest. It just won't shoot through the holes to catch the
top twigs. Even when a hole is large enough to shoot through to the
crown, its broad beam will tend to catch a closer twig. It takes a lot
of work to measure the most distant crown points to see if they are the
highest. However, it has an accurate clinometer, which is better than
the Suunto. It is also the instrument of choice to a tree trunk when the
target can be hit. Tree trunks are where a reflector per Don
Bertolette's suggestion really comes in handy.