ETA don't get caught up in comparing glass. This scope will perform well in that regard, just saying there is so much more to a scope than the exhausting "glass comparison" everyone loses their mind over. Only thing more annoying to me is the complimentary "how are the clicks" in every scope review thread lol. sorry rant over ha...
ReGArds
DT
Death by comparison?

Unfortunately it is a reality and just something that we do innately, why are reviews so popular on websites? If I'm looking for a new car, HDTV, camera, you name it - I'm usually googling the name of the item with the word "review" immediately following. Magazines don't hold much weight for me anymore as plenty of times their reviews are biased by advertising dollars, what most people want are "honest" reviews, by real people, who use the items in the real world. And what are we really hoping to find out in the review, how that model "compares" to other models either from the same mfr or a different one. Specs are fairly easy to compare but the intangibles like "glass" and "turrets" are the things that no manufacturer is willing to quantify, at least not yet. They do make equipment that can identify light transmission, resolution, CA and other optical characteristics; however, just like MTF charts don't tell the whole story for photographic lenses, these tests won't tell the whole story either.
I admit that I get caught up in the "glass comparison" vacuum, maybe sometimes a little too much because I have my bias'. Anyone who's followed me for a while will know that one of my greatest pet peeves in sport optics is CA, it absolutely drives me nuts to pay $2k or more for an optic and see heavy CA, under $2k I'm a lot more forgiving (but still annoyed) because I believe most manufacturers should be able to control CA, especially with modern manufacturing techniques. However, that's me and I realize there are plenty of shooters who don't see CA in the conditions they shoot in and therefore are not bothered by it. I also tend to prefer "warmer" glass and I often find this warmth coming from glass manufactured in Europe vs. Japanese glass which tends to be cooler. I am not an optical engineer but I'd wager that any glass manufacturer (regardless of which continent they sit on) could make warmer or cooler glass (case in point - I find March or Deon Optics glass to be much closer in color cast to their European counterparts). But all these things are subjective, it doesn't mean they don't matter it just means we all have personal preference. Just because I prefer Brunette's doesn't mean the guy who likes Blonde's is wrong, we just have different tastes and so goes it in the sport optics world (and really any industry) which leads to all kinds of different options to choose from. But this presents another dilemma, with so many options to choose from, "which one do I choose?" is usually what most begin to think, and so they look to review sites and forums like Snipers Hide to get various opinions. Most consumers want the most for their money, and by most it depends on what they are looking for - what matters "most" to them. With FFP long range shooters the first priority is usually tracking - do those turrets track true throughout the range of elevation and windage, next up might be reticle or glass and all the nuances that come along with that. Then there's ergonomics like length, weight, illumination, resistance of turrets and magnification ring, etc. that matter to some.
As a competitive shooter DT, I think you've shown the new XTR III can certainly track true and by experience with other scopes can give a thumbs up on quality both mechanically and optically. So when comments are made by others like "I'm waiting to see how the XTR III compares to Brand X Model Y" I don't think it's because they don't trust you or others, I think it's simply because they want to know that this is the best scope for them within the budgetary constraints they have. That being said, I do like what you say about certain features or attention to detail that Burris has accomplished with the XTR III, for competitors the "Race Dial" feature is really slick and I can certainly see a benefit if you know distances ahead of time. I'm one who thought the XTR II turrets were some of the best for a $1k optic so to hear that the XTR III is even better is icing on the cake. So it usually comes down to glass comparison and I'm not so much concerned with how does XTR III glass compare to brand X model Y, but simply put - how good is the XTR III glass on its own merits? I purchased a Burris XTR II 4-20x50 soon after they first released and my scope suffered from an extremely finicky eyebox due to an optical aberration that some of the first 4-20's suffered from, this caused eye fatigue quicker than any other higher end scope I had used before. That jaded me for several years toward Burris, especially with the issues the first T5Xi scopes had that were made at the same Burris facility, those first 5-25 and 3-15 scopes had more CA than I'd seen in any scope regardless of price which immediately turned me off, not to mention some of the tracking issues they tried to ignore initially. But I'm a forgiving person and was finally convinced by birddog to give the 4-20 another shot, he assured me they had addressed some of those early issues and last year I bought another during one of their crazy sales and was pleasantly surprised to see the glass was much better and now I have no issues recommending the newer XTR II 4-20 especially for those tight on budget (they can be had for well under $1k these days if you do your homework). As for the T5Xi, I have no desire to try another because many still report CA issues, that and the fact that the new XTR III tromps it in FOV and magnification, the XTR III 5.5-30 actually has wider FOV at 5.5 (23.0' @ 100y) than the T5Xi 5-25 at 5x (21.4' @ 100y) plus the XTR III 5.5-25 is also shorter and lighter and according to DT has better turrets - win win as long as the glass is not horrific, which early signs indicate it is not and, in fact, is very good for the price.
While my previous experiences with Burris and Steiner have made me trepidatious (I will not be another early adopter), I am very excited to see these scopes come to market because I believe they have the potential to shake up the market if they live up to the pre-release reputation. I have an opportunity to go visit Burris this year once they have the SCR2 reticles available at the Greeley manufacturing facility so I am anxious to get up there soon and experience these scopes first hand.