lemoyne

I have had only one Leupold, and felt that it was never quite as clear as the Nikon's I have the Nikon Omega on my Triumph and they match up quite well the reticule took a bit of getting used to but I like heave loads and they match up to the yardages well after I learned to use the top and bottom of the circles for in between yardages I found it work rel well with my laser range finder. Lee

saxman1

I had two nikons,the buckmasters 3x9x50 and an Omega.
I love the eye relief and the clarity.I did not like the BDC reticle.

I had a Ultimate Slam and the glass and eye relief were excellent but I didn't like the reticle.

I now have the Toby Bridges ML scope and I love the reticle but the eye relief is to short,it has to go.

Nikon and Leupold will be my top choices when I get another.

bronko22000

You know I really don't think it matters. I started out with Bushnell scopes a long long time ago because that's what my grandfather and uncles used and it was the best we could afford at that time. Since then, I've had Leupolds, Burris and Nikon. To me, its like trying to pick the prettiest Playboy bunny to go out with - IT DON'T MATTER - give me any one?
The lens treatments today are superior to those years ago and all three of these brands are, at leastto my eye, excellent.

Old/New

I have two Bushnell Elites...one 3200 & one 4200, both with Rainguard. I like the rainguard. I also have a Nikon Monarch that I consider excellent. It's mounted on a .280 Rem.