What do you guys think of this scope? I'm looking at one for my Omega. I want to put a 4-14 X 42 on it and get a Laminate Thumbhole stock for it. Let me know what you think of this scope or Burris in general. Thanks for the help.

I have heard many people say the Fullfield II is a great scope for the money. I have a Euro Diamond 30mm on a rifle and so far I have been pleased with it.

Sold mine 3-9 for half what I paid for it after one hunt. Performed terribly in low light and had zero contrast. Passed up 3 deer I could plainly see with the naked eye. Shot great from the bench. Got free binoculars with it that I kept.

Last two scopes I bought and loved were a Nikon Monarch UCC and a Redfield.

you wont find a better scope for the money. clear optics and performs great in low (legal light) if your state is like mine and legal is half hour before sunrise- half hour after sunset. I am not sure about how good it gathers light after or before legal light, i dont hunt during those times. With practice the ballisticplex reticle is dead on and works flawlessly.

I've used several FFII's as well as a several other scopes from both his price range, and the next price range up. My personal opinion is that the FFII is by far the best scope I've looked through until you step up to a Zeiss Conquest for double the price. While I do find the glass in the Conquest better, the difference isn't huge by any means and is pretty minor. Only you can decide if it's worth double the price for you. To me it's not, and the FFII is the way I'd go. If you want finger adjustable turrets Burris will add them for $80 if you send the scopes into them. If you aren't making adjustments in the field the standard adjustments on them are pretty good. These scopes imo are one of the best buys out there. I've got a 3-9x40 and a 4.5-14x42 at this moment, but I've owned several more 3-9's over the last few years and I've been impressed by all of them. If you ever have to use Burris customer service, I have had great experiences with that part of the company too.

You must have gotten a bad one, because all of the FFII's I've had have had very good glass, and it's one of the area's where they really excelled. They have had great contrast and the colors look very vivid, as well as excellent low light performance.

I own 2 Nikon Monarchs, and honestly I think the glass in the FFII's are much better. I see a lot of chromatic aberration with the Monarch's, and don't see any with the FFII's, and in low light the FFII is the clear winner.

That said, I don't own nor have I ever owned one of the newer Redfields, but I do have and have had a few VX-I's and the glass in the FFII's blew the VX-I's away. So did the turrets, and the durability, as I've had an extremely high failure rate with the VX-I's. I've also had a VX-I, and while the glass in it was closer to the FFII than the VX-I, I still found the FFII to have slightly better glass. While the turrets in the VX-II were a step up from the VX-I, I also give the nod to the Burris in this department.

The only thing I don't love on the FFII's is the eye piece that rotates as you change magnification. This makes it hard to use flip up caps, but the new E1 model fixes that. I've yet to test out one of the new E1's, but I would like to, and I love the original FFII's and like I said the only improvement I really would like to see is the change to the eye piece that the E1 fixes, so I want to try out one of those too.

As for the reticles, many of the Burris scopes have their ballistic plex reticle, and while I'm not really a fan of ballistic plex reticle's, or bdc style reticles or anything else, the Burris one is my favorite I've used. I much prefer to dial the turrets in for the range I'm shooting, and find it more accurate than hold over reticles, but if you don't want to do that and want a ballistic plex style reticle I find the Burris to be one of the less distracting ones with hash marks that are reasonable in size. To me the circles on the BDC reticle from Nikon are too large and too much of a distraction for me. They are large enough that it's hard to hit precisely at longer ranges for me. On the Burris, I don't have this problem. There are a few other decent ones that are similar to the Burris style too though. Like I said, I still prefer adjusting the turrets, but if you want this style reticle this is one of the better choices in my opinion.

If you have any specific questions about these scopes, please and I can try to answer them for you. If you end up going with one, I think you will most likely be happy you did. I know I was, and I've gone with several more since I got my first one.

Mine must have been a lemon, but fruit from the product tree nonetheless (lenses coated incorrectly?).

I had deer come past, one at 7:15 and another at 7:30, sunrise around 7:16, and I could not make it out or see the cross hairs.

Could not see another one at 4:15 p.m., and sunset was 5:30. I could see the crosshairs, but the deer did not contrast with the leaf cover.

Switched to an old Bushnell Banner in the gunsafe for the rest of the hunt.

My Monarch is an older UCC version. Have not used one of the newer ones.

The Redfield is just stunningly clear. But then so is the $50 dollar Bushnell.

Cabela's has the Bushnell Elite 4200 3x9x40 for $179.00 and the Elite 3200 4x12x40 for $199.00. I have both scopes and would highly recommend them. Awesome prices for both items.

Yeah, something was definitely going on. I have had 4 or 5 of the 3-9's over the years and 2 of the 4.5-14's and none of them have been like that. They have had the best glass out of any of the sub $400 scopes I've tested. The only one that's beat it in the $400-600 price range I've seen is the Conquest and it's very small differences glass wise between it and the FFII's.

I'd actually like to replace my current Nikons with a FFII. If I find a good deal on a used FFII I'm going to pick it up and sell off one of the Monarchs I have.
Burris probably would have taken care of you if you'd called them.

The one time I did have an issue with one, I thought it had an issue, but realized afterwards the issue wasn't really an issue, and something they all do. I'd just called to ask Burris about if it was normal, and they asked me to send it so they could check it out. Anyway, this was right out of the box. I called them up, and they told me to send it in and paid shipping both ways. I had it back in under two weeks and it still did it which made me realize I needed to look into this on the other scopes. All of the others also did this, only this time there was a small spec of dirt or something you could see internally if you held the scope up to the sky. I called them back and asked if them how they would like to handle it. They paid for me to ship it back again and this time they sent me a brand new scope. I'd sent in one with the plex reticle, and they replaced it with the ballistic plex reticle that sells for $100 more. I couldn't have been happier. After this experience it sold me on their service. At least they paid for shipping both ways. I'd say this put them ahead of Leupold in my experience as Leupold has always at least made me pay shipping to them on the first time. After that if they send it back and it isn't fixed they have paid for the return shipping on the second trip, but with Burris they payed it on both trips.

Knowing that it's a great product, and they are this willing to take care of me for something that isn't even a issue at first, and just something that I was wondering about sold me on them. When it came back and did have a small issue, to see how fast they were to replace it for me, made me even happier. I just don't think you can beat a company like this.

Very well written and dead on!!!!!!

What are the differences between the E1 and the FF II? Is it just the eye piece?