It seems to be a matter of "religion" on the net that Leupold makes the best scopes.
Is there any evidence that Leupold is any better than Burris. Specs and warranties seem to be the same except that the Leupold 1.5-5 comes with a 20mm objective and the Burris equivalent, which is actually 1.5-6, comes with a 40mm objective. With an illuminated reticle it costs less. Even without the illuminated reticle, it should be better in low light conditions. For mounting on a magnum, why shouldn't the Burris hold up equally as well?
