Vortex Optics Solo R/T 8x36 Monocular - MRAD Based Ranging Reticle, Utility Clip, Adjustable Eyecup, Rubber Armor, Non-Slip Grip, Fogproof, Waterproof - Unlimited, Unconditional Warranty

This is a very very nice monocular. For what you get at this price point it is worth every penny. I live on the east coast so shots out past 500 yards are rare so the 8x36 is perfect for out here. Ranging is simple math you can find the formulas on line. I’m ex Military so for me it is very easy that’s why I like this reticle. If you live in the plains states or out west you may want to go with the vortex 12 or 15 power depending on your range. Glass is very good no issues. I have terrible eyesight now that I’m old but I was able to focus the reticle so I don’t need to where my glasses when I use this. If you have a MRAD scope this makes great sense because your footer can use this and tell you how many mills to adjust

I use the Bushnell G-Force 1300 ARC. It is a wonderful tool for measuring distance to objects. However, sometimes I need to know the height of the object I am measuring, such as a building, utility pole or tower.The Vortex Solo R/T SOL-3608-RT is a tactical monocular that has a hash-marked reticle which uses MRAD-based subtensions for ranging, holdover and windage corrections. Basically this is a fancy way of saying it has crosshairs like a rifle scope. The crosshairs have little hash markings going up & down and left & right on the crosshairs.They are typically used for a shooter to calculate distances of objects of known height (normally human targets). There is lots of useful information out there telling you how to use these markings for calculating distances.However, that is not what I wanted to use it for. I use my laser rangefinder for measuring the distance. I wanted to use the MRAD subtensions for calculating object height. It works very well for giving me reasonable estimates of object heights.Here are the formulas if you want to calculate object heights using the Bushnell Laser Rangefinder and the Vortex Solo R/T Monocular.To measure height in inches, if you know the yardage to the target:Multiply the yards to target by the measured MRADS and then divide that number by 27.7777777. The answer will be the height of the object in inches. (Note: each little mark on the crosshairs is one MRAD, they are very easy to count).For example, I just measured a Toyota 4Runner. Using the Laser Rangefinder, I measured the distance as 106-yards away from me. Next, I looked through the Vortex monocular and read the height as 18.5 MRADS. So, I multiplied those two numbers together, which resulted in an answer of 1961. Next, I divided 1961 by 27.7777777. The answer was 70.6. So, I estimated the height of the vehicle as 70.6" or 70 5/8" tall. Looking up the vehicle specifications, it is listed as 71.3". That is an error of about 1%. Pretty darn impressive.Another formula allows you to measure the height of an object in yards, if you know the yardage to the target:Multiply the yards to target by the measured MRADS, then divide that number by 1000. This will give you the height of the target in yards.For example, say you measure something 425-yards away and using the monocular you measure its height as 13.5 MRADS. You would multiply 425 x 13.5 = 5,737.50. You would then divide 5,737.50 by 1,000 which would result in 5.7375-yards tall (or 206.55 inches tall).The trick seems to be holding the monocular steady while you make your reading. The more accurate your reading, the more accurate your result. If you need to be very certain of your calculations, take several readings from different distances from the object and perhaps from different angles. Write them all down then figure out their average. You'll probably be pretty darn close.Also, using the same formulas you can calculate the length of an object. Just use the left-to-right hash marks, instead of the top-to-bottom hash marks when measuring the length of the object.Hope this helps.PS - I ordered the Bushnell Legend Ultra HD Monocular, Black, 10 x 42-mm at the same time to compare them. The 10x zoom was nice and the image did seem brighter or sharper, hard to quantify, but I did like it better. Also, the focusing mechanism was far superior. Vortex should replicate their focusing mechanism. However, the Bushnell monocular is much larger and the case was more then twice the size of the Vortex case. In the end, my 12-year old son and I both agreed we liked the Vortex monocular the best. It just felt most natural in our hands and we liked the eye cup design.The Bushnell cannot be used for measuring heights. Several people commented about the Vortex belt-case design. I really like it. It is compact and easy to slide the monocular into. If you are journeying into rough terrain, you should probably consider investing in a more industrial case. If your lifestyle is less harsh, the free case included with the monocular should be perfect for you. Other people commented about not liking the crosshairs in the viewfinder. Strangely enough, I preferred the crosshairs. I found it easier to track objects that were moving.

The media could not be loaded. I wanted a small monocular that was crafted of decent quality, somewhat rugged, small enough to fit in my hand without looking like a pirate, and not so expensive that it would cause rapid and violent swearing possibly followed by tears of anguish if I dropped it.It came down to either this Tactical model or the Vortex Solo 10x36. So I ordered both and did a side by side comparison.They are both solid performing for their price range, far better than the cheaper plastic models and most every unit available under $90. No real comparison. Spending $200-300 on a monocular requires a very specific need or desire - neither of which applied here. Are they clearer? Sure, but not by much. These units are both very well made with a killer warranty.To clarify a few things (no pun intended), the 10x model versus the 8x model are just about identical in viewing color and clarity. Science will tell us that the 10x model doesn't allow as much light to the pupil, but you would need a very accurate measuring device to verify that with these two models. They are both nearly identical in dimensions, the only difference being the location of the pocket clip - the tactical version has the clip attached ½" closer to the eyepiece.Do you really need a range finder? It can be a little distracting, depending on what you're looking at. The mil lines that you use for this action are small by design. So imagine you're standing there holding this thing with one hand and trying to hold your target at the crux of the crosshairs and count mils. You also need to know the height of your target, which becomes really important at longer ranges. Elevation differences, lighting, and environment all effect this equation, so practice with known objects first. At ranges over 200 yards, you might want to be leaning on a tree or employ the use of a secondary support. Practice brings accurate results. There's no direct attachment point for a tripod or holder, so what do you do? Here's a very simple free tip that someone smarter than me can make money from - Use a magnet on the supporting device to snatch the giant metal clip on the side. Stability is your friend. A mini camera tripod (like this Pedco UltraPod II Lightweight Camera Tripod) a magnet setup would be small, light, cheap, easy to make, and totally sweet.This unit is about five inches long, not seven as listed in some descriptions. The 10x does make the view closer, but not by much. If you're on the fence about getting an 8x or 10x, but want the range finder, you're not really sacrificing much. Both units will easily spot or track a person / place/ thing / animal with ease. I like this for a very simple reason - no batteries. I can see stuff closer, figure about how far away it is, clip it to my person, or put it in the relatively useless holder. The EOTWAWKI types will appreciate this. When the stuff gets tough, you can laugh at the gear geeks with the laser range finders that don't work for sake of dead batteries.To that aspect, the holder needs help. There are no lens protectors for either unit, the case is supposed to provide that, which is sort of does. A neoprene scope cover might do well for this, and would be preferred. Simple, quiet (no Velcro), offers multiple levels of protection, floats if dropped separately, and still allows use of the clip. If you sew on a flap to hold the included lens towel, you've got a winner.In the accompanying video, any shadowing, blurry or fuzzy edges are strictly the result of this amateur photographer using an iPhone through a magnifying device. There's some science (and frustration) behind using two lenses out of alignment and fighting with the autofocus feature that wants to "see" the reticle not the target. If you're ever looking to use this to take pictures - practice first. A lot. It's not like your paying for film. So there's a real world example if you try it yourself. I have big hands, and it was still a challenge to hold the phone in perfect harmony with the monocular and tap the screen or squeeze a button without screwing up the picture. It's not a wondrous piece of cinematic excellence, but it's the only one on the net that shows what it does. If you're shopping for a quality monocular, I hope it helps.