The only difference between the two, as far as I have found, has been that although all the lense surfaces are fully coated, the Vari X III uses what Leuopold refers to as " Multicoat 4" caoting on all lens surfaces. The VX II uses Multicoat 4 on the exterior lenses and a different coating on the interior, non-exposed lenses. A friend of main who is a sporting goods salesman said the Leupold rep told him that the difference is so subtle that you would never be able to tell the difference. There is also about a $200 difference for comparable models. My question is do any of the members here have an opinion on this matter? Do you own either model and have any firsthand knowledge on this subject???

Yellowlabman, you have it right,the difference is in the optical quality VxIII a bit better light gathering but in my opinion not enough to justify the extra $$$.You will be happy with either,but I only purchase the VxII' s,Just purchased a 2x7 for my Omega .50.Good Luck

It amounts to around 4-6% more light transmission capabilities with the vari X III (95%). The VX II I have heard is 88-91%. Multicoating on all lenses will lead to better optical quality all around, this includes light transmission, clarity, resolution & brightness. The light gathering capability should be the same if the objectives of both models is the same (FYI, 50 mm objective equals about 2% more light gathering characteristics than a 40 mm objective in a comparable scope).

Thank You