Since you insist. I've learned that there are folks who post here that either don't understnd, or aren't aware of, eye box differences or their worth to a hunter. So any eye box testing of an S&B vs. a Leupold would have to be done by me.
The ability to track is only of value to those that shoot tactical style rifles. Hunting scopes, as discussed here, are zeroed and must only be able to be zeroed and to hold their zero. This bussiness of testing a rifle scope by "shooting the box" as it is called is of no value in 4X scopes w/o target or tactical adjustments on them.
I've never tried out a 4X S&B. It may or may not resolve as well or better than a Leupold. I have compared a 6X Leupold with a 42mm objectice to an S&B PMII, 50mm variable. When set on 6X, neither I, nor it's owner, could adjust either to see any difference in resolution. What I said, or infered, was that since S&B's like the other euros I've played with all seem to have small, or much smaller eye boxes, I presume it would resove a hair or two better because of that in the 4X models.
Any difference in resolution ability if it favored the S&B would be so small that it wouldn't be practical to spend the extra money on. If it did involve a difference in eye box size, it would not be a desirable trade off.
There is also the consideration of how well it holds zero when impacted. The only testing of this sort I know of has been conducted by Ray Atkinson. He says the older 3X, the 4X and the 1.5-5X20 VXIII, Leupolds do this best. I don't know if he has tested the 4X S&B in this way. I know he has tested the smaller S&B for recoil resistance however. So he is familar with them.
Last of all, the euro focusing system offers nothing to me. Since I have had my locked Leupold oculars move due to the way I carry them, I assume the euro system would too. Again, not a potential problem I want to gamble on. E
