Bushnell DMR II Pro 3.5-21x50
- Thread starter Mik123
- Start date
Totally different product, but I have a Bushnell LTRS 4.5 - 18 x 44 and I really like it. I compared it to Leopold and midrange Vortex. It just had a crisper image to me.
Built in Japan, the only other option is an optic built in Germany imo. I held one DMR in Wanstall's and the only thing that held me back was price.
you should be happy, except for the weight.
Built in Japan, the only other option is an optic built in Germany imo. I held one DMR in Wanstall's and the only thing that held me back was price.
you should be happy, except for the weight.
The LRTS is a fantastic scope.
I'm ok with the weight since it's going to be a range toy, I have no interest in taking it hunting.
I have its twin the LRHS 4.5-18x44 on my AR10. It's a fantastic scope for the money.
I'm ok with the weight since it's going to be a range toy, I have no interest in taking it hunting.
Looking forward to hearing what you think about it. If you're ever up in Pemberton (haha) I have 2 HDMR2s, we could do a side by side comparison. They've both been super reliable, track perfectly and hold zero. I think the only difference with the Pro is that it has better glass?
Right on. Do you have any time with the standard DMRII? Super interested to hear your thoughts.
The LRHS/LRTS are hidden gems in the world of LR scopes. Nice feature set, excellent ZS. Great glass/reticles. Rock solid, accurate tracking over thousands of rounds, IME. I think they would have a much larger following if they didn't have the Bushnell name on them.
No the LRHS is the only Bushnell I have right now. I bought mine when Al Flaherty was blowing them out. With the Bushnell rebate it came out to under $800 I think. I'm just kicking myself for not ordering at least one more.
Right on. Do you have any time with the standard DMRII? Super interested to hear your thoughts.
The LRHS/LRTS are hidden gems in the world of LR scopes. Nice feature set, excellent ZS. Great glass/reticles. Rock solid, accurate tracking over thousands of rounds, IME. I think they would have a much larger following if they didn't have the Bushnell name on them.
No doubt. That's a steal of a deal. I looked all over for one around that time too, but never found one for that good of price.
Look forward to your impressions on the DMRII Pro!
Did you get this scope? Have you used it much?
The Bushnell DMRII Pro is at a different level of glass. It would be more comparable to the Nightforce ATACR.
mustang979
Regular
as someone that has both, no, it is not. It is good glass, but if somone told you it is on par with an ATACR, they were blowing smoke up your backside. there is a reason the ATACR 5-25 is almost twice the cost of the HDMR II Pro.
The DMRII lives on my AR, and it is a great optic for that. I've pushed it out to 600M and it has perfomed well (far superioir top the previous FFP bushnell scope I had on there, but not comparablen to a niightforce. It's maybe a HAIR ahead of a vortex PST in terms of optical quality/resolution.
Ha ha that's good stuff right there. Which DMRII are you referring to? DMRII? DMRIIi? Or this one?
Is there a HDMRII Pro? I thought it was only available with the G3 reticle?
I agree if you are referring to last year's DMRII, that scope is not the same glass as an NF ATACR.
Anyways, yes after using them all, and comparing all, I will say the ED glass in a XRSII or a DMRii Pro is comparable to any NF ATACR glass. At half the price of the NF ATACR , the DMRii Pro is one hell of a scope.
Last edited:
I always find these arguments about glass quality to be kind of inane. For one, "glass quality" can often be a personal preference thing. Did the coating manufacturer A used make the image look better to your eye than those manufacturer B used. People obsess and go on and on about things like chromatic aberration and this and that. I'll grant it's fair to be critical about high dollar optics but to a point. Just take the damn things out shooting and figure out if t works for you.
I currently have 2 Bushnell HDMRIIs and 2 Leupold Mk5 5-25s. For the money, the Bushnell's are great scopes. They hold zero and track dead on and have a reticle and features I quite like. I've used them both out to 1600 yards with success. I' be curious to get behind one of the Pros to compare.
To my eye, the Mk5s are superior in that they maintain edge to edge clarity better at max magnification as well as have a more forgiving eye box at max as well. I've looked through Atacrs, Kahles, S&Bs and most high end optics and they are really nice but to my mind, once you get to something like an HDMRII you really start hitting the point of diminishing returns. I say that as a guy who shoots LOTS of PRS-type and field matches. Obviously nothing against buying nice but it's funny to watch people bicker about glass quality and whatnot. At the end of the day, they're telescopic sights, not camera lenses...
I currently have 2 Bushnell HDMRIIs and 2 Leupold Mk5 5-25s. For the money, the Bushnell's are great scopes. They hold zero and track dead on and have a reticle and features I quite like. I've used them both out to 1600 yards with success. I' be curious to get behind one of the Pros to compare.
To my eye, the Mk5s are superior in that they maintain edge to edge clarity better at max magnification as well as have a more forgiving eye box at max as well. I've looked through Atacrs, Kahles, S&Bs and most high end optics and they are really nice but to my mind, once you get to something like an HDMRII you really start hitting the point of diminishing returns. I say that as a guy who shoots LOTS of PRS-type and field matches. Obviously nothing against buying nice but it's funny to watch people bicker about glass quality and whatnot. At the end of the day, they're telescopic sights, not camera lenses...
I have one on the way now as well. Having owned 2 of the DMRII since they were released, it'll be interesting to see how much of a improvement the Pro is. If any.
