there have been a few threads about this unit. I figured there might be some more updates to it. I bought a Nikon 440 which works great but might be interested in the RX-II if the compensator works good.
That pretty much sums up my findings also.kgn said:I bought the RX II when it first came out. I was mainly interested in the compensation factor for uphill/downhill shots. I noticed that the compensator didn't work for anything over 60 yards. As a target shooter, I needed something that works out to the longer distances normally shot. I called Leupold and was told that on the "bow" settings they can only compensate accurately out to 60 yards so that is where they set the maximum for this feature. This is for bows only due to the low speeds. For the rifle shooter, they range much further. For those hunting this would be fine as most shots would be inside of this. In general, the rangefinder works well. The optics are good and it does range accurately within +/- 1 yd.
True . . . but since the price was more or less the same between the RX-III and the other range finders I looked at I figured I might was well have the compensation. Bad decision at first . . . I had to send the whole thing back to Leupold because it wouldn't range anything dark but the new one they sent me works like a champ. I just leave it in TBR mode. Even if it is only a couple yards difference, I have it and might as well use it.KBacon said:Mr. October.. From heights that are higher.. or in very hilly country.. I could definately see an advantage. But for the average treestand from average heights.. I didn't see as much difference.