I would agree with Swampman. I for several years was a tried and true Leupold fan. I've owned a number of them and still have many. When I was shopping for a new scope I began researching because of the Leupold price tag. I ended up buying a Bushnell 4200 Elite 2.5-10X40MM. I think this was a solid purchase. I have set on the porch many evenings and watched the local wildlife with a Leupold 3.5-10X50 Vari-X III and the Bushnell. To my eye and also my wife's which is a hunter we both agree the Bushnell is sharper and gathers just as much light as the Leupold. I won't sale the Leupolds I have mounted already on guns but in the future I will be putting the 4200's on my rifles. Especially when a model like I have can be bought for $300 vs. $500 for the Leupold. The Leupold does have a little more eye relief at 3.7" at 10X and the Bushnell has 3.5" at 10X. The Leupold will also be a little shorter and weighs about 2.5 ounces less. If you need this then buy the Leupold but I can handle a few more ounces for around $200 less.

My good hunting buddy has bought a Zeiss Conguest 3-9X40 and I can see no difference if we are looking at dusk through both scopes except the the larger price tag.

I've heard in the past a few state the Bushnell would not hold up to heavy calibers as to this I can't say. My cousin has an old Ruger 77 that he has had a Bausch & Lomb 2.5-10X40 mounted on for about 10 years with no problems. The Bausch & Lomb name has been dropped but it's the same scope I have that says Bushnell on it.