I'll give you a couple more.
I love it when guys misquote me. For instance, I've never said that there were no very small differences in the image quality between a fixed eye relief Zeiss with an eye box half the size of a comparable Leupold. What I've said is that when there is much of a difference, I suspect that's a difference in focusing procedures.
Another very funny thing is every time this comes up, it's always about the VXIII vs. the Conquest. What should be the comparision is the Leupold VXII, and the Conquest. You rarely see that.
Then we can go on to the silly stuff. Leupold's reticles aren't as sharp as Conquest's. Quite true if you just go far enough focusing them until they "look sharp enough." It's image and low light performance are better. The fact that the Leupolds transmit as much light for all practical purposes as the Conquest and that that means nothing at all. Hilarious considering the previous statement. And, of course we never discuss eye box, or impact/recoil testing, etc.
Lots to laugh about. E
