While you are on the site, in your browser find and click "Add to Home Screen" A CGN beaver app icon will then be created to your phone that is directly link to the site.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have a cheap 1.5-4.5x Bushnell... obviously not something you'd want on a "real" rifle but thought I'd chime in on the "1.5" vs. "1" issue. You can run it with two eyes open, but I find all I "see" is the image through the scope. No 3D image like you'd see through a true "1". I recently sent back a replacement scope that had been advertised as a 1-4 that turned out to actually be a 1.25-4. If you can, try before you buy to make sure it is a true "1".
The Leupold is a superior sight.
The Falcon Menace is a competent lower powered scope.
The Millet is very attractive, a bit more expensive than the F-M.
Battery dependent units are useless when the battery fails. Two piece sighting units are unnecessarily complicated.
That is a F-M on my bitser AR. It has worked very well to 500m.
I would suggest that you actually try different sights, at different ranges.
I cannot imagine that a sight with a lower limit of 1.5X or 1.6X would be less useful than a 1X one.
I have one of the VX-II 1-4X as well, and it's a pretty decent optic. I like it, but I had it into Korth, and they tidy'd it up, then put on a set of elevation and windage target turrets on it. Looks kinda goofy now with the high profile rings on it, but it's quite accurate, and I'm pleased with it.
+1 - if you can swing this, you're getting 'real' equipment. I have a Millet and it is a great deal for the money, but it's "hobbyist" grade. The Comp+ magnifier is professional gear. The 2 are not comparable.