Rifle Scopes Burris xtr3 vs MK5 vs RZR gen 2

[Blackice55]

Which one would you guys choose?

 

[Genin]

I chose the MK5 HD after getting my hands and eyes on the others. The leupold was the best one to MY eyes. Turrets were also the most positive.

 

[Blackice55]

I chose the MK5 HD after getting my hands and eyes on the others. The leupold was the best one to MY eyes. Turrets were also the most positive.

I don’t think you can go wrong there. I just kinda question the mark 5 glass vs the vortex.

 

[Genin]

Is there anyway you can go and get your hands on them? I am lucky in that I live very close to Euro Optic so I just drive to their showroom and play with whatever I’m considering purchasing.

 

[264win]

Don’t know if weight is a concern, but the mk 5 is the lightest And the gen2 razor is pretty heavy

 

[The Busby]

Razor for sure...in my opinion. Mostly for this particular reason....I have 2 Gen II Razors on my match guns for 4 years now....each one getting around 5,000-6,000 rounds a year and roughly 5-7 PRS matches and a few others....neither Razor has ever....ever....gone down or tracked improperly. That to me is worth ALOT.

 

[Secant]

Not a great comparison, but I have a 3.6-18 Mk5 & a 4.5-27 G2R. I like about everything about the G2R better than the Mk5 (turrets, eyebox, DoF, etc.) except weight.

I haven’t touched an XTR3, so I can’t say anything there.

 

[MarinePMI]

I have 2 G2R’s (both mag variants) and the Mk5 5-25. They’re damned close in clarity. Color is totally different, with the G2R’s having brighter color. The Mk5 just seems a bit washed out in comparison. On the other hand, the Mk5 blows the G2R away with low light performance.

I also have an XTR II, but that’s not even a fair comparison to what is being said about the XTR III (which I haven’t seen yet). The XTR II is in another (lower) class. As is the PST.

 

[Lunabear]

When you compare prices(especially used market right now) I thing the gen 2 stands out but I have not spent any time behind the xtriii or the mk5

 

[Lunabear]

I think that statement makes sense if you are getting a significantly nicer scope for the same price point these scopes are going for. But these scopes are all pretty close.

I wouldn't pay $1600 or $1800 for any of these on the used market when you can get such a comparable price for something new.

What’s retail or second hand on the xtriii and mk5? I’m seeing gen 2 razors 4.5-27 for12-1500

 

[beetroot]

My personal issue with the MK5 is that looking through it compared to the Razor and even more so, the XTR3, is that it's like looking through a tunnel. The Razor and Burris have much nicer edge to edge eyeboxes in them. The scope ring on the XTR3 is very thin, the Razor almost as much so, the MK5 not at all. I dont necessarily think this effects performance. I still think the MK5 has a decent eyebox, as I mentioned, its personal preference. It's not as visually appealing to me.

The specs would certainly show the MK5s FOV is tiny compared to the other two.
It'll be interesting once the 3.3-18 XTR is out as it really seem's too be the perfect middle ground in weight and is very well featured.
The 3 scopes mentioned are extremely closely priced through Hide vendors, I think there's maybe $50 difference excluding the illuminated MK5.

One interesting thing to note is the Leupolds seem to be resoundingly better in low light, which along with the TMR reticle and lower weight may make them the choice for a hunting scope. Although I don't know how well the 44mm 3.6-18 stacks up against the 50mm Razor and XTR3.

 

[Blackice55]

It would be interesting to see a real world review of how these optics stack up to something of a higher price point. Is the juice worth the squeeze on the Schmidt and bender or zero Compromise? How much clearer are these optics vs the ones mentioned above?