I was in store today and purchased a Leupold Rifleman 3x9x40. I choose it over a Nikon Buckmaster 3x9x40. I spent alot of time looking through them in different light and comparing them. I thought that the Leupold was more clear and bright. I also like its sleeker look and the reputation of Leupolds Customer Service in case I ever need it. What are your thoughts?

Seems like the time to get other thoughts, opinions, suggestions info etc was before you purchased it.

So I am unsure how to answer. I have made the same comparison and came to the opposite conclusion. I am sure that isn't what you want to hear.

I am sure Leupold will take care of you if service is ever needed. With luck it never will be.

$bob$

I think you should have got the Buckmaster.

The Loopie Rifleman didn't come close to the Buckmaster as far as I'm concerned.
The Buckmaster compares better with the VXII.

The Leupold Rifleman is Wal-Mart's wonder and features questionable edge-to-edge clarity and a range of resolving power sure to give you a headache when trying to see detail downrange. And it transmits around 86 percent of the available light -- so there's no way in Hades that it would be "brighter" than the BuckMasters.

Keep the Leupold address handy with your registration. Many folks who buy the rifleman find they need it -- and it's usually sooner than later.

For the same $$ you spent, you could have purchased the Nikon BuckMasters, a Burris FFII or an Elite 3200, and you'd have had better quality. Leupold makes good, solid products. But the Rifleman isn't one of them...

If you are looking for or needing validation of the purchase, then take it back now. I agree with the previous posters. Personally, I consider the Nikon Prostaff better than the Rifleman.

LWD