leupold vs burris.....opinions wanted

nelly250

nelly250

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
150   0   0
Location
Thunder Bay, ON
Hey all, im trying to decided between a Leupold VXIII 1.5-5x and a Burris Shortmag 2-7x for my Marlin 1895M. Both scopes have what im looking for - short overall length, lots of eye relief and a low power setting. I do like the fact that the burris has a higher power setting (for range shooting) and a larger objective lens (26mm vs 20 on the VXIII), but there is very little info on the burris, probably becasue its new. I am leaning towards the Burris, but i have a couple Burris Fullfields and i've never tried a Leupold. Any opinions/experiences would be appreciated.
Cheers.
 
pick them both up in the store and look through them.

IMO the major thing in Leupold's favor is that they have a warranty centre in Canada. so if there is anything wrong with it you can just mail it to their Canadian warranty centre and youll get it back in around 2 weeks turnaround time.

with the Burris you will have to ship it to the US and face delays, customs/border hassles, confiscation, etc. last time i sent a computer video card to the States for warranty replacement, bloody customs charged me handling fee, tax and duties even though the box was clearly marked 'WARRANTY REPLACEMENT'. i hate Canada customs so much.

something to consider.
 
The burris probably has better optics and a more robust construction. And a lower price tag.

Although, the warantee thing is a good point, if that matters to you
 
prosper said:
The burris probably has better optics and a more robust construction. And a lower price tag.

Although, the warantee thing is a good point, if that matters to you
Click to expand...

Oh come on, I can handle guys comparing Zeiss and Swav's and even Bushnell to a Leupold, but Burris??? Get a grip, better optics? Robust construction? Man, you got one thing right, they are cheap!
 
We're not talking about the fullfield here, that one's only about comparable to a VX-II. If you have a light meter, you can MEASURE the difference between a burris and a Leupold. With a resolution chart, you can MEASURE the sharpness of the image. This ISN'T opinion. As far as construction, the Leupold used leaf springs, and the Burris uses coils
 
I agree with Prosper, sorry Open-Sights. I have had a bunch of each. The Burris Fullfields are ever bit as good as a VX-II. The Short Mag has better lenses than the Fullfields and would definetly be as good as a VX-III. I think that they are also very well built for a lot less $$$. Warranty, yes Leupold is awesome and I can't comment on Burris as I have never had a problem with any of mine.
 
I have a Burris at about 150 rounds on my 378 weatherby so far, and a Leupold at about 30 rounds on my 500 a-square. Both are holding up well so far.

Actually, out of about 50 or so scopes I've owned from $100 chinese clones to thousand dollar authentic versions, I've had only one failure and that was a cheap-ass tasco
 
prosper - whats your opinion on the Burris Scout scope?
need a scout scope and trying to decide between that and the Leupold. i admit though that the service issue is making me lean slightly towards the leupold.

Leupold FX-II 2.5x28mm is $260. Duplex reticle. mod # 58810
Burris 2.75x24mm is $205. Heavy Plex reticle. mod# 200269

going to be forward-mounted on a mosin, hehe.

oh and sorry for the mini-hijack, but it fits the whole leupold vs burris theme :)
 
Last edited:
I was glancing at the specs in Cabela's so they maybe wrong...but it appears the Leupold has 66 feet FOV@100 yards at 1x setting versus 32 feet FOV@100yardsat 2x setting for the Burris.

Since this is a Lever rifle and likely to be used at 200 yards or less I would opt for the Leupold hands down strictly for the wider FOV.
 
LOL!

FOV is DIRECTLY related to magnification. In fact, it's basically describing the exact same thing. There's not a 'better/worse' thing here, it just is. Find a 1x burris, and it'll have the same (or very similar) FOV, and vice versa with a 2x leupold
 
prosper said:
LOL!

FOV is DIRECTLY related to magnification. In fact, it's basically describing the exact same thing. There's not a 'better/worse' thing here, it just is. Find a 1x burris, and it'll have the same (or very similar) FOV, and vice versa with a 2x leupold
Click to expand...

He was comparing 2 scopes....

The Leupold has better FOV@100 yards...

Now, if were going to compare EVERY scope on the market there 1000's of different choices...?

He did NOT have a 1x Burris as one of his selections or did I miss something...


1 more thing...prosper

You might want to take a look-see at the NEW line of Swarovski scopes...seems they must be magical or something because their 1x scopes have 100 feet of FOV @100 yards vs. 63 feet for Leupold 1X...how is it possible???

They maybe lying but that would be false advertising?
 
350 Mag said:
Since this is a Lever rifle and likely to be used at 200 yards or less I would opt for the Leupold hands down strictly for the wider FOV.
Click to expand...

that is a good point, everything is a trade-off...the 1x of the leupold would be better for those close hunting shots and the 7x of the burris better for the range shoots. Im still not 100% on which to choose, but it'll probably be the burris. I wasn't aware that the Short-Mag had better lenses than Fullfield, so that is good to know. Thanks to everyone for the input.
 
have you considered fixed power?

theres just something about the purity and clarity of fixed powers. lately i find myself just leaving most of my riflescopes at their lowest power setting, so fixed low-power scopes just seem the natural choice for me.
 
350 Mag said:
You might want to take a look-see at the NEW line of Swarovski scopes...seems they must be magical or something because their 1x scopes have 100 feet of FOV @100 yards vs. 63 feet for Leupold 1X...how is it possible???

They maybe lying but that would be false advertising?
Click to expand...


Well, you're right, you do have to factor in things like lens diameter and eye relief.

For example, take a piece of glass, and draw a circle on it with a marker. Hold it 2" from your eye, and estimate your FOV at a hundred yards. Then hold it 6" from your eye, and do it again. Now erase the circle and draw it again a half inch bigger, and do it again.


For what it's worth, I have a fixed 2x Leupold LER scope on my 500 a-square, and it's FOV is miserable. But then again, it won't smoke me in the head, and the rifle's more at home shooting charging african game at very short distances
 
manbearpig said:
have you considered fixed power?

theres just something about the purity and clarity of fixed powers. lately i find myself just leaving most of my riflescopes at their lowest power setting, so fixed low-power scopes just seem the natural choice for me.
Click to expand...

i only gave fixed powers a quick thought and for me they are not versartile enough. With a variable power i can set it on the lowest power for hunting (where it almost always stays) or i can crank it up at the range. If this rifle were to be soley a hunting rifle a fixed power would require some more thought, but becasue I'll be using it quite alot at the range i really want a variable power.
 
nelly250 said:
i only gave fixed powers a quick thought and for me they are not versartile enough. With a variable power i can set it on the lowest power for hunting (where it almost always stays) or i can crank it up at the range. If this rifle were to be soley a hunting rifle a fixed power would require some more thought, but becasue I'll be using it quite alot at the range i really want a variable power.
Click to expand...

Just be mindful that some scopes(even expensive ones) that have the reticle in the 2nd/rear focal plane may have a POI shift when power settings are changed. It may only be a few thousands of an inch at the scope but this could translate into 1 inch @100 yards difference in point of impact.

Most American scopes are manufactured this way....

The best ones with tight tolerances will have less POI change...cheaper manufactured scopes could have alot of POI shift when adusting magnification.
 
Last edited:
I was just reading about the Short Mag scope yesterday, and the one concern raised is that on the 2-7 model there is only about 1" between the objective bell and the elevator to mount the forward ring. That's going to leave you no leeway to adjust fore and aft for eye relief...

For that rifle I'd choose the Leupold myself. And as far as that goes, I'd pick the German #4 reticle for quicker target acquisition, as opposed to the 'Ballistic Plex' in the Burris, which is for longer range shooting... not really the forte of the 450 Marlin.
 
Last edited:
I just picked up a Fullfield II 4.5-14. I'm taking the VariX II 3x9 off my .223 and mounting the Burris just for a change of pace :) After looking through both scopes, I don't see any real world difference. I've had Burris before with no problems so I'll see how this one stands up on the go-to coyote rifle this winter :sniper:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom