VXII VS VX III for short range

Hello,

I am deciding between the VX II  3-9x 40mm  and the VXIII  2.5-8 36mm on a 22 LR
I am mostly going to use in dirty woods for partridge, so sometime there might not be a lot of light, So a 40MM would be better. But then again these birds are sometimes very close so a 2.5zoom might be better.  What should I consider? and what would some of you purchase... also considering the VXIII has a better lense coating.

thanks

ken

the coating and other quality issues will make more differancethan a few mm

Actually I would select neither since you are using a 22LR. Those are both centerfire rifle scopes and are probably parallax set for about 100yds. I would be looking at a rimfire scope that is parallax set for about 50yds. And if you go with one with an AO or side focus you might get down to 10yds. You need to check to see how close they focus. You might get by with one of the scopes you listed if you only use them on very low powers, but I think there are much better choices for a 22LR.

A buddy of mine just purchased this Leupold. And it is very nice.

http://swfa.com/Leupold-3-9x33-VX-2-Rimfire-EFR-Riflescope-P51833.aspx

This one is about $50 less.

http://swfa.com/Leupold-3-9x33-VX-2-Rimfire-EFR-Riflescope-P51834.aspx

Also another good choice would be a Weaver rimfire scope. And their is a rimfire section here that would give you some other good ideas.

If you find parallax to be a real issue for you.  Leupold can reset it at the factory for a fee.  Some people freak out of a bit of parallax; others never notice. YMMV  The VX-3/111 has a clearer grade of glass. 

At the moment I have have  a bushnel banner. The parallax is pretty bad , the cross hair moves like crazy, I viewed the  VXII and VXIII mentionned above and they seem to be good scope focusing at close range was not an issue. but at 12 feet the VXIII at 2.5x does offer a wider view which I liked. The VXIII also site lower then the VXII 40mm. I think I'll go back to the store and have a look again lol