Bushnell Medalist vs. Pinseeker 1500

[WhiteSoxFan]

There are a couple of good threads on Rangefinders already.

Rangefinders
Which Rangefinder is best

Neither one really addresses the Bushnell Medalist. It has slightly fewer features and is slightly less powerful than the 1500. It also retails for $100 less.

Here are the highlights of the differences.

1500:
Reflective Surfaces 1500 yds.
Trees 1000 yds.
Flag 400 yds.
Better optics coating
Slightly bigger and heavier
Magnification 7x
Same targeting modes, pinseeker, accuracy
Retail $400

Medalist:
Reflective Surfaces 1000 yds.
Trees 700 yds.
Flag 300 yds.
Slightly smaller and lighter
Magnification 4x
Retail $300

I'm seriously considering the Medalist, mostly because of the cost savings, and that it seems like it is "good enough", i.e. I don't see needing to get yardage from 1500 yds. away vs. 1000 or a flag from 400 vs. 300.

Does anyone have a Medalist that they could comment on?

Those of you who have (or have used) the Pinseeker 1500's, seeing the specs above, does the Medalist seem like it will work well, or is the 1500 absolutely the way to go?

Thanks,
-WSF

[iacas]

I think the magnification factor alone may make the difference if it were me.

[Silvertree]

Golfsmith let me take all of them outside to test them. I agree with Erik on this one, the extra magnification is well worth it.

[WhiteSoxFan]

I think the magnification factor alone may make the difference if it were me.

Thanks for the replies. So, does the main benefit of a higher magnification factor apply to it being a rangefinder (i.e. making it easier to find a target that you want a distance to) or more as binoculars (i.e. allowing you to see the details of greens / bunkers / other course features of the area where you intend on hitting the ball)?

[iacas]

Thanks for the replies. So, does the main benefit of a higher magnification factor apply to it being a rangefinder (i.e. making it easier to find a target that you want a distance to) or more as binoculars (i.e. allowing you to see the details of greens / bunkers / other course features of the area where you intend on hitting the ball)?

Mostly A - it's easier to put the little circle on the flag and not the tree limb overhanging the green or something.

A little bit of B - "use as binoculars." I know I've appreciated the magnification when there are some cute women a few fairways over. Oh, sorry for blowing your cover re: "details of greens/bunkers/other course features." Unless cute chicks fit into "other course features...". Anyway, mostly A.

[WhiteSoxFan]

Wow, I was expecting to get more responses to this thread. Don't any of you guys use rangefinders? I find myself getting more and more frustrated with the lack of marked yardage out on the course, and I'm really looking forward to getting one to take matters into my own hands. I also question the accuracy of what is marked out there.

Mostly A - it's easier to put the little circle on the flag and not the tree limb overhanging the green or something.

Cool, thanks, you've got me convinced, I think I'm going to throw down the extra bill and get the 1500, especially since this is a somewhat long-term investment - I'd rather get the right thing the first time.

A little bit of B - "use as binoculars." I know I've appreciated the magnification when there are some cute women a few fairways over. Oh, sorry for blowing your cover re: "details of greens/bunkers/other course features." Unless cute chicks fit into "other course features...".

Cover is completely blown!

Not to my wife though... yet. I've been trying to explain to her how frustrating it is, and why I NEED this rangefinder. I won't explain to her about how it will help me to see the, um, details of the "other course features".

[Kellfire]

How about the Bushnell X-500? How does it match up for a budget player trying to figure out his range?