scope v. scope
#1
scope v. scope
I'm looking to buy a new scope. I have narrowed it down to the Burris Fullfield II Riflescope 3-9x40 or the Leupold Rifleman 4-12x40. Through my own research the only big difference is that Burris scope captures more light at the darker hours than leupold does. Your thoughts, input, advice? I am leaning more towards the Burris because of the Balistic plex reticle.
#9
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,553
RE: scope v. scope
I would also suggest the Burris FF II out of the two you put out. The bushnell Elites, 3200 and 4200 are fantastic as well. If you are looking for a less expensive scope that it clear and sturdy, take a look at the Nikon Prostaff.
#10
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: golden co
Posts: 852
RE: scope v. scope
Get a 4X or 6X fixed power scope like the Nikon Monarch, MUCH brighter and clearer than most variables on the market. The trouble with variables is the fact they have more glass and moving parts, to get a variable spotting scope or rifle scope to compare with a decent fixed powered scope you have to spend BIG bucks.