Looking for a better LRF, and am trying to understand "Beam Divergence" numbers. What I think I know is that the smaller the beam, the better it would be in the field for getting an accurate range on a smaller target when looking through trees for example. The beam divergence for a Vortex 4000 is 2 mils wide by 0.1 mils tall. is this at a certain distance, or does it get wider the further out you go? The Leica 2800 divergence numbers are specified differently. Leica says 10 up to 200, 200 up to 400... What do the Leica numbers define? and how do I get an apples to apples comparison between the two range finders? Thanks for any help on this!
LRF Beam Divergence numbers - Help me understand
- Thread starter insidetheten
- Start date
Hi was new to me as well, I researched the specs and found out through buying and testing that the specifications don't tell the whole story. Some actually have a beam that is aligned with their specification, others specification is an "effective" number after going through DSP algorithms. There is a good thread discussing this and some actual night vision testing of a couple of these.
Thanks Seansmd and Blacksmith for your replies. Blacksmith - I worked on a PM for 45 years and we used laser alignment systems to set large parts of the machine. I think I get that part, you explained it very well. Seansmd - thanks for the link. The video illustrates part of my question where it shows the size of the beam at 25yds. I guess that without knowing distance/time you cant really compare divergence number specs given by LRF manufacturers. Leica says 10 up to 200. 10 what? CMs? Vortex says 2mil X 0.1. so I should ask "At what distance?" I guess an over simplification of my question is "Is the Vortex 400 beam smaller or larger than the Leica 2800 beam at a given distance?" Thanks again guys for the info you supplied.
That video posted shows the sig kilo 3000 to have an extremely large beam. It didn’t look like a beam but more of a reflection or a bad angle. I would hope that the owner would have contacted sig if the beam was indeed out of spec or the unit wasn’t working correctly.
I checked my beam out last night with NV and it was very small. Since there isn’t a standard to test these beams I’d say it’s all in the marketing or whatever each manufacturer wants to claim.
If you are trying to compare the Leica 2800 to the vortex 4000, they aren’t even in the same price range or class. The vortex is just a rangefinder and the Leica has Bluetooth and software that provides ballistic calculations.
The vortex should be compared to the leupold rx-2800 tbr, the Bushnell nitro 1800 or something in that price range. The Leica 2800 can be compared with the vectronix terrapin or maybe the sig kilo 3000.
If you are in the market for something new, what are your needs? Just range finding, ballistic solutions, binocular/range finder, bluetooth, budget, good specs on paper, etc.
I checked my beam out last night with NV and it was very small. Since there isn’t a standard to test these beams I’d say it’s all in the marketing or whatever each manufacturer wants to claim.
If you are trying to compare the Leica 2800 to the vortex 4000, they aren’t even in the same price range or class. The vortex is just a rangefinder and the Leica has Bluetooth and software that provides ballistic calculations.
The vortex should be compared to the leupold rx-2800 tbr, the Bushnell nitro 1800 or something in that price range. The Leica 2800 can be compared with the vectronix terrapin or maybe the sig kilo 3000.
If you are in the market for something new, what are your needs? Just range finding, ballistic solutions, binocular/range finder, bluetooth, budget, good specs on paper, etc.
Last edited:
So now the circle comes around and the best info for me to make a decision is how these things work in the field when operated by folks doing the same thing I would do with one. What I am interested in right now is just rangefinding capabilities. I'm not shooting matches yet, as I feel I need to polish my skills a bit more before jumping in, so blue tooth is not really needed at this moment. I do have the 4DoF Kestrel that I can input the range. Currently, just accurate ranges for hunting is what I would be doing, with some ranging of targets at our local club. The Leica 2800 does a lot more than the Vortex 4000, and the price reflects. going on just rangefinding capabilities, If the Vortex will accurately range a small target through a loop better than a Leica, and the optics are comparable, I would buy the Vortex. If it was the other way around, and the Lieca performed better under the same circumstances, I would pay the extra money and get the leica even though I dont need the BT capabilities. The Leica is the top of my price range, so the Terrapin seems to be off the charts right now.
I was in the same dilemma as you. Wanted a rangefinder to hit at least to 1800 yards. Bought the Kestrel 4DOF and then ordered the Leica. The ability to link the rangefinder to the Kestrel is great. 2 vendors here who can give you a good price if you call them.
I did contact Sig, and I received a response from their engineering that sounds with Blacksmith above their beam cannot be measured as they rely on the strength, there beam strength was significant stronger, and their dsp to create an effective divergence.
They willingly returned my unit, and I bought a Leica based on this and field test we did side by side that led us to look at it with night vision to confirm. Diver in the other thread led me through this, he has significant experience.
The sig was able to get returns on very far targets, but unable to navigate loops that the leica handled with ease.
I have no experience with the Vortex.
The Leicas ability to handle loops was what initially what made me look at it. Just recently I have read a few reviews that folks are saying the Vortex 4000 performs as well, but does not have the other capabilities of the Leica. Would like to see a side by side comparison of the Leica 2800 and the Vortex 4000 ranging abilities. I had not considered the Vortex prior to reading the recent reviews, was just looking at the Sigs and Leica.
No it was at red bluff match through the trees at the square range ask diver he was running the leica
A Mil is a Mil. Regardless of distance. Mil is an angular measurement like moa. To answer your question:
The absolute size of the beam grows with distance.
A mil is simply 1/1000 of your distance.
So at 100yards your 2 mil beam is 1/5 yards wide and
at 1000 yards distance it is 2 yards wide.
Last edited:
Similar threads
