I use my .308 on the range as well as for deer and its wearing a Burris Fullfield 11 3-9x40 at the minute, the scope has accounted for deer in different conditions and produces pretty good groups out to 300 yards on the range. i think its a crackng little scope but i need a bit more mag for the range. I bought a scope recently which had everything i needed, but for some reason the reticle looked washed out when looking at dark, shaded areas so it went back. I bought a Meopro 4-12x50 yesterday after going to the shop for the 6-18x50 that had sold out. Looked great in the shop and down the road, a bit more mag and a thinner ret too. Looked through it last night as the light was going and its clearer around the edges than the Burris but the Burris is clearer where it counts in the centre, also found theres not much difference going from 9-12 mag. Had my eyes tested recently and alls ok, the Burris is a cheap scope, the Meopro while not expensive is rated around Conquest quality. Pals of mine have Duralyts and fixed Swaros and Schmidts that i have used and to be honest they did not seem any better to my eyes than the Burris, i can see the quality of the build but cannot see the difference in the glass. I have used the Burris till it was dark enough that i would not take a shot and its been spot on. Would i have to spend a fortune to instantly tell a scope was a mile ahead of the Burris optically or is there something wrong with my eyes and i am kidding myself on rating the Burris?
Sorry about the long post but i cannot keep buying scopes and returning them.