HomeStorage DevicesHard DrivesEIDE Hard DrivesNikon ProStaff 550 Laser Rangefinder (Green) |
|  | | | Customer Reviews: | | | Average Customer Review: ( 60 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
143 of 143 found the following review helpful:
Testing two nice Nikon laser range finders, Others to consider Aug 12, 2009
By Dragon Speak
"goldragn"
I have compared the Nikon ProStaff Laser Rangefinder 550 to a Nikon Prostaff 440 and a Bushnell Yardage Pro Sport 450, using all three on the same targets.
Note: I have NOT tried these units on a golf course. All three units are made in China.
The Nikon 550 is a very capable laser range finder, and is very similar in ability to the Nikon 440.
The main differences between the two are the slightly greater range of the 550 model.
Despite the understatement of the advertising, I have ranged out to 706 yards with the Nikon 550, and 545 yards with the Nikon 440.
Dark trees can be ranged up to about 400 yards with the Nikon 550, and 330 yards with the Nikon 440. Deer can be ranged to 300 yards reliably with both. The 550 model has a magnification of 6X and the 440 unit is 8X and I greatly prefer the 8X view of the Nikon 440.
Both have a diopter adjustment which is adequate for my eyeglass correction of +5 diopters with and without my glasses.
I also find the long rubber eyepiece of the 550 unit difficult to use if I change to and from eyeglasses, as I do not like to keep folding the rubber down, and I know from experience that you can fold these type of eyepieces only so many times before the rubber (or vinyl) cracks.
Ranging Performance is:
Dark trees: Nikon 550 400 yards, Nikon 440 330 yards
Telephone poles: Nikon 550 430 yards, Nikon 440 360 yards
Deer: unobstructed medium deer, both 300 yards
Dark shrubs: Nikon 550: 400 yards, Nikon 440 350 yards
Light colored buildings: Nikon 550 535 yards, Nikon 440 453 yards
Very reflective targets, eg trucks, Nikon 550 706 yards, Nikon 440 535 yards
They both acquire targets well and range accurately when compared to other units.
I am biased to wards the Nikon 440 unit, because:
1. it is smaller and handier
2. It has 8X magnification which I really like and use (and need)
2. It is adequate for anything out to 300 yards and often 400 yards
3 It costs about 60 dollars less than the Nikon 550
5. The battery compartment screws down 3 turns and seems better sealed than the 1/4 turn compartment of the Nikon 550
6. The optics are virtually the same on both except for magnification. Both are clear and bright.
7. Generally, the range is perhaps 15 or 20 percent more for the Nikon 550 unit due to the higher laser power (15 watts pulse vs the 8.5 watts pulse of the 440 unit).
Other notes;
The Bushnell Yardage Pro Sport 450 is not anywhere in the same league as the other two, despite the price (I paid 179). The Bushnell is simple to use but will not read beyond 230 yards on any but the most reflective target, despite what the advertising says. The longest range I could measure with it was 330 yards and that on a reflective sign. This unit is supposed to range up to 800 yards (732 meters)! It will range a tree up to 200 yards as claimed, but the best it will do on medium deer is 140 yards. It is a 4 power monocular, and will range down to 6 yards, the others will range as close as 11 yards (10M). This Bushnell is by far the lowest quality of any unit I have seen. Bushnell claims water resistance, but there are various entry points for water, and if the unsealed battery compartment is opened, green circuit board is visible. If the rubber eyepiece protector is removed (all too easily) the optics are exposed and vulnerable. There is absolutely nothing to protect the electronics and optics from water and moisture. That along with very poor ranging capabilities make this Bushnell Yardage Pro Sport 450 nothing more than a child's toy, albeit an expensive one.
30 of 31 found the following review helpful:
 Just works! Apr 21, 2009
By KYU SEOK CHO
I bought this for my golf play. It just works as expected. Compared to my friend;s similarly priceed bushnell rangefinder, Nikon 550 detects range faster and higher success rates. And this is even smaller and lighter also. I'm totally pleased the quality and price of this rangefinder.
56 of 62 found the following review helpful:
 Not Good For Golf Feb 23, 2011
By Jianwu Yi
I bought this mainly for golf. I tried the Nikon 8358 in the range from someone else and was really happy with it. Then I came to amazon to try to buy one but I found the ProStaff 550 is much better deal so ordered one. I thought the difference would be just the distance range. For golf, I really don't need 1200 yards. 550 yards would be more than enough for me. However, when I took it to the driving range to try it out, I was extremely disappointed with the ProStaff 550. It was so difficult to get the distance, even for flags within 100 yards because it picks up the trees or any objects behind the flag. To me, it's really useless. For golf, you need to get the callaway LR550, which is also made by Nikon and looks exactly the same. However, there is a major difference, which is LR550 added a first target mode which displays range to nearest target.
20 of 20 found the following review helpful:
Nice basic laser rangefinder. Mar 26, 2009
By Nukedude
"Travelling Techie"
I bought this at a big box store and used it later that day. This unit is light and easy to use. I only wish it had the 8X magnification of the 440 and a Bushnell unit I have used in the past. This unit works well though and does what a rangefinder is supposed to do, give you the range to an object. I have used it out to 270 yards and it has been able to range off of both highly reflective objects, as well as those that are not very reflective. The dull olive drab green color goes well in the toned down look you may need in the field as well. Recommend this for anyone that just needs distance to target and not a downward or incline angle distance. Note that this does not have a ballistic computer to calculate slope angles in it. It is made for level and flat ranging only. But then at the price $180-200 this is just fine.
13 of 13 found the following review helpful:
Does exactly what it should for golf - don't listen to the haters! Sep 17, 2010
By Garrett
I've seen people criticize this rangefinder because it's hard to hit pins when golfing. Well guess what, flagsticks are tiny, of course it's hard to hit. If you want pin-seeker technology, then pony up the extra $100 and get one that has it! Personally, I just shoot people who are on the green, or shoot the ground near the hole and you'll get exactly what you need. None of us is Phil Mickelson, 2 yds difference to the hole when you're 170yds away isn't going to matter much. And when you're closer in (where it actually might matter), it's easier to hit the flag or the ground next to the hole.
I've used this on 5 rounds of golf now, and it's perfect. I find scan mode to be the most useful because it's easier to know when you've hit whatever you're aiming at vs. objects in the background/foreground. The readings are completely accurate and reliable, the casing is durable and water-proof, and it's very easy to use. It's been a huge help, even off the tee because so many courses are inaccurate with their signs and scorecards. The magnification is fun too. The laser is good at ranging normal targets from 250+ yds away. I've had it over 300+ with no problems as well, just for fun. It can probably go farther.
I heard the battery case comes off easily and gets lost, so I just put a piece of tape over mine when it arrived, and that's definitely done the trick.
See all 60 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
| | |
|
|
