Burris FF II vs Nikon Buckmasters

I know this is kind of a double post, but I couldnt find the information I was looking for in the other post. Looking at the 3-9 x 40 models. This will be mounted on a Savage Model 11 .308. Will be used for hunting whitetail at a maximum distance of approximately 300 yds with most shots being 125 and under. I'm mostly concerned with being able to shoot at dawn and dusk when theyre movin the most. Which scope will be clearest and draw in the most light? Also which reticle will remain more visible at these times (nikoplex vs bplex or plex)? Ive done quite a bit of research myself and have narrowed it to these two unless of course there is a scope I'm overlooking in the same price range. The Primos is out of the question as I cant stand the bdc reticle and the Elite 4200 is just a little out of my range at the moment...

try this out maybe it will help you decide
http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=21176

I have a 3-9X40 FFII and mechanically it is very good. At 9X it gets blurry at the edges, but otherwise it works fine.

thanks pyro.

and....if I were to throw the 4200 into the mix, how would that change things? I have not had the opportunity to look through one. I have seen the other two under artificial light, which of course doesnt mean much.

I was considering the same scopes and the difference I saw was the Nikon was brighter and I liked the Nikon BDC reticle over the Burris version.  I did buy the Burris but also bought the Nikon Team Primos from SWFA w/out looking at it.  I assume it will be just like the Buckmasters.

after reviewing koshkin's inexpensive scope thread I am now questioning the vortex diamondback, however there are no local retailers....was it honestly that much better than a ff II?

i would hands down go with a nikon though i prefer a monarch they are worlds apart from a buckmaster

I have heard great things about the monarch, its just out of the price range. really would like to hear from anyone who has owned both the buckmaster and ff II

The Team Primos, which SWFA has, is supposed to be a rebadged Monarch.  Can anyone verify?

correct with the exception that it has the bdc reticle only

MBar308 wrote: I have heard great things about the monarch, its just out of the price range. really would like to hear from anyone who has owned both the buckmaster and ff II

the primos would be a step up from the buckmaster as well as the FFII. i liked the ballistic plex better than the bdc myself, but i didnt like the FII as much as the primos as far as glass quality goes.

MBar308 wrote: after reviewing koshkin's inexpensive scope thread I am now questioning the vortex diamondback, however there are no local retailers....was it honestly that much better than a ff II?

no I'm not questioning honesty at all. I greatly appreciate your write up. its just like I said, there are no local retailers. And I'm uncomfortable buying without seeing. Therefore what I should have asked is if it is indisputably, hands down better.

and pyro, I have to agree. I'm just not crazy about the bdc reticle...I don't see how you can be dead on with an open circle.

check out the nikon coyote

sorry for the delay in response. Went with the FFII and although I am pleased, I wish I wouldve spent a little more on a Vortex Viper, Bushnell 4200, or Nikon Monarch...

I have FFII (4.5-14x42(AO)) and its pretty clear and tracks well too.  Dunno' which size you went with but when i was looking at these, there was quite a diference between a Burris 3-9x40 FFII and a 4.5-14x42 FFII.