I have a 308 encore pistol now and would like the groups pros and cons of the Burris and Leupold scopes. I have always preferred the Burris because it has the widest field of view but I have seen a preference to Leupold here in the past. What is the advantage of Leupold.

I greatly prefer the longer eye relief of the Leupold scopes. I have two Burris pistol scopes. I like the 2x and abhor the 2-7x for its rediculously short eye relief at 7x. Had the 12x version as well for awhile. Short eye relief and I ran out of turret adjustment trying to hit a 500 yard target with a 50gr BST from an HS Precision .223 Remington SP. Might as well use a rifle scope and get greater power and adjustment range.

Not a Burris fan.

What are your uses for your Encore?
Typical distance and max distance?

NEVER BURRIS ............ NEVER the worse scope I have every purchased everyone of them failed. I have NEVER had Leupold fail.

Only had 1 Burris out of 14 fail the last 14 years. Did a doe at 581 this year with a BPlex. Love my Burris'.

Of the two, I'd probably go with Leupold.

I do not mind the clarity of the Burris. There customer service, though PAINFULLY slow, did replace an antiquated fixed power scope I had with a new 2-7x one that I own now.

It's just their eye relief on the higher power that sucks yam sacks.

At one time I had a lot Burris LER's. They worked great for me in a variety of shooting and hunting conditions.
I think I have had one go down on me. I didn't/don't have as many Leupold LER's, but I have had one go down on me as well.
They both have their strengths and weaknesses for my uses.
I like the Ballistic Plex reticle with the Burris. There are no reticle options for the Leupold.
I like the turrets better with the Leupold VX-3's.
Eye relief has already been mentioned. It is not an issue for me.
The Leupold has a LOT MORE internal MOA. Big plus if you are extending distance.
With Burris Signature Zee rings and the BP reticle, I can do about anything I want.
The 3-12 is limited here though.
More magnification with the 3-12 with a PA.
Each has their strengths.
Get what you want.

I hunt deer usually less than 100 yards but I am hunting new area with shots over 200 possible. My self imposed max range is 250 yards. I shoot the hornady 150 grain bullet.

I would look through both then make up your own mind.
I wouldn't go with a 3-12 for sure though for what you are looking for.
2-7 or the 2.5-8 if you are looking for variable magnification.
4x fixed would too.

I own 9 Burris scopes and 4 Leupolds. I can tell no difference between the two in regards to performance and clarity. That being said, I would never pay the amount charged for new Leupold scopes. All of mine were acquired in trades and if they ever go down, I will replace them with a Burris.

I have a burris ballistic plex 2 ?7 on my 308 encore and when I run up the magnification past 4 I get the doughnut hole effet at full length arm extension because I have to hold the gun out at half distance to get a sight picture its not comfortable or accurate for me . Wish I had got the Leopold.

Weaver 2.5-8. I love mine.

My choice as well over either of the aforementioned options.

Never had a problem with the Burris and I've several. Have a couple of Leupolds, too. I prefer the Burris.

I've been very pleased with those I have as well.

I had no idea there was any other optic company other than Leupold!!

Burris hands down for me.
I've owned 4 Burris LER, still have 3 variables and never had one fail. Im not a leup basher, but for my eye the Burris has a more forgiving eye relief. The leups I had flipped to black ridiculously easy. I shoot more of a semi "modified weaver stance" with my handguns. The leups ,Ive also had 4,(2 4x and 2 variables), needed full arm reach. Just didn't work for my shooting style.
Clarity to me was no different.

(heck a Bushnell elite had the clearest optics I've ever used!)