I have the DMRII Pro on my primary match rifle, and have owned a few regular DMRII. The eyebox is very agreeable, but so is the EB on the LRTS/LRHS 3-12x, IMO. Both are so easy to work with that I haven't really noticed much of a difference between the two scopes, WRT EB, though the DMRII is slightly easier to get behind. But the optical difference is fairly remarkable in favour of the 3-12x. I've shot PRS-style matches with both, and I would take the DMRII Pro, then the LRTS 3-12x, with the DMRII non-Pro in third place, if I had to choose between the three for competition.
Thanks for the additional information Jordan. I'm going to give the DMR II a whirl anyway, to see if it's good enough for my needs in terms of image. If not, I'll send it back.
You’re not the first guy to tell me that, and you wouldn’t be the first to send one back.
In ideal lighting conditions the image in the DMRII is great, but in mirage or anything less than perfect conditions, it’s like looking through a fish bowl full of water. The LRTS and even the $299 SWFA Classics do much better in poor lighting conditions. If the image works for you, you will be very happy because everything else about the scope is awesome. The DMRII Pro has all the same awesome features as the DMRII, but handles poor lighting conditions significantly better.
Hopefully you are happy with the DMRII! Let us know what you think after you have some use on it.
