• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Rifle Scopes Compared my PST to a NF.

T

tickled pink

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Aug 29, 2010
553
0
78
Just north of Atlanta
Don't laugh. I do need to say the new NF = ?x to 20x by 50mm which was at the range today the focus was not adjusted perfectly for my eyes. The NF reticule was much thinner than my 6-24x50mm PST FFP MOA scope, but ( maybe because the NF was not in perfect focus it was not as clear ) as my PST. In fact the PST seemed much brighter then the NF. Even one of the other shooters that had a NF BR scope made a comment of how clear my scope was.

This was the first time I was able to compare mine to a NF. This really surprised me.

40gt
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

The day I don't have to wait months for one will be the day I'll buy one. I should of just kept my order I made in feb instead of opting out =\
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: furtaker_.223</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have to tell ya, I just purchased my first NXS, is is by far THE clearest I have ever bought. I have nice glass, but the NXS trump's them all. </div></div>

Absolutely!



I don't understand some of these threads with "maybe it wasn't focused" or "maybe I miss counted the clicks" or "maybe...... What's the point being it so subjective?
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

I don't think one should use a NXS as a standard in the glass quality department. While NF scopes have a lot of good features/qualities, superb glass, IMHO, isn't one of them. I have owned many over the years and have yet to be blown away when I looked through one. I would classify NF glass as GOOD, not GREAT.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: matchking</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't think one should use a NXS as a standard in the glass quality department. While NF scopes have a lot of good features/qualities, superb glass, IMHO, isn't one of them. I have owned many over the years and have yet to be blown away when I looked through one. I would classify NF glass as GOOD, not GREAT. </div></div>

I agree, i have nothing but good things to say about my Nightforce NXS but a quick peek through a Schmidt&Bender reminds me that there is better glass.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: furtaker_.223</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have to tell ya, I just purchased my first NXS, is is by far THE clearest I have ever bought. I have nice glass, but the NXS trump's them all. </div></div>

Never owned a S&B, Hensoldt, or Premier I take it??????
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

I wouldn't say that the glass in a Nightforce is just good. I'd say that it's very good, with the likes of Hensoldt having superb glass. I'd put the likes of Super Sniper and the Vortex PST in the "good" category. I don't know why guys have to knock the glass in the Nightforce scopes. I know they aren't the best, but to say that the glass is just good infers that the glass is just average.

I have both a Vortex PST SFP 6-24X50 and a Nightforce 5.5-22X50 and I can tell you that the PST is not the equivalent of a Nightforce.

I'll tell you what. Take your PST and get it up to your eye with it set on 24X. While looking through it, dial it down to 6X. How much of a shift in eye relief are you getting?
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

I call the NF "good" because of the price. My 5.5x22 was good enough to shoot but my Weaver does just as good and at almost $1k less. Is zero stop and a name really worth that much money over a scope that has proven reliable to me? Nope.

Just to clariry, i don't think my 4-16 glass was as good as my NF nor my bushnell, obviously not my weaver.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

Isn't that like comparing a Ferrari with no wheels to a Volkswagen Bug...?

It's not even a comparison when one is handicapped.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

Ask yourself if the small difference you see in the glass really worth the big difference in price... I'd rather spend my money on other things I don't need
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

OOPS, I had the PST FFP MOA scope on 24x and the NF was on 20x and we were both looking at our targets which were next to each other at 400 yds.

I just called the guy with the NF and he said that his was an older one and it is 5.5-20x56mm.

The reason why I was so surprised that my new 6-24x PST FFP MOA definitely looked brighter and clearer was because when I had the first 6-24x PST which was exchanged for this one with the tighter turrets I compared the old one to this NF and the NF was much clearer.

"SORRY" guys I guess I need to do the comparison again. I will also call Vortex and ask about this.

40gt
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

I think the point is that Vortex has surprisingly good glass for the money. I own a Vortex Viper 6.5-20X44 and a Leupold VXIII 6.5-20X44. The Vortex cost 60% of the Leupold's price and the glass clarity and resolution of the two scopes is very similar.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

Same, PST is about like a varix-iii in terms of glass quality. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another.

edit: I wish they'd hurry up and get the FFP 6-24 mil mil's out in quantity.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

Interesting how everything seems to always be about clarity and not durability or repeatability. Drop, bump or bang your rifle/optic and see how important that "clearer" glass is when you miss your next target by a foot or more. Clarity is but a very small factor in choosing an optic.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hawk45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Interesting how everything seems to always be about clarity and not durability or repeatability. Drop, bump or bang your rifle/optic and see how important that "clearer" glass is when you miss your next target by a foot or more. Clarity is but a very small factor in choosing an optic. </div></div>

+1

I rather have a super reliable scope with decent glass then a scope with the best glass on earth with a marginal track record and spotty quality.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

Took my PST 4-16 x 50 SFP mrad down to the range the other night. Had it next to scottishtornado's 5.5-22 x 50 NXS and you could definitely tell a difference during fading light. It was a distinct difference and there was no denying it, the NXS was clearer. Both scopes were on the same power (15X) when making the comparison. However we both agreed for the money the PST is a hell of a bargain and didn't give up a ton to the NXS. After looking through it he said he'll probably order one for his 308...

I really am happy with my PST, but it is <span style="font-weight: bold">NOT</span> a Nightforce glass wise, and I'm OK with that. It has things I like better than the NXS in other areas and was waaaaaaay less $. I think it's the "happy spot" for me on the performance vs price scale.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bacarrat</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hawk45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Interesting how everything seems to always be about clarity and not durability or repeatability. Drop, bump or bang your rifle/optic and see how important that "clearer" glass is when you miss your next target by a foot or more. Clarity is but a very small factor in choosing an optic. </div></div>

+1

I rather have a super reliable scope with decent glass then a scope with the best glass on earth with a marginal track record and spotty quality. </div></div>
I agree, Clarity is only one feature to consider in a scope. I want a scope that can take a beating,track reliably every time i make an adjustment,has good glass,and a proven track record of making ultra-reliable quality scopes. Hard to beat a Nightforce.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

dimar, I usually shoot at Nick's in Garyville, unless I have the opportunity to get to a place with more space.

Don't get me wrong, I think that the PST is a nice scope. All I'm saying is that the NF is better. I mean, I ordered my PST with the idea that, if it was as good as I hoped it would be, I'd sell off a couple of my Nightforce scopes and buy four PSTs. I really was hoping that the PST would be this breakthrough product that would let me put the days of having to spend $1500 on scope everytime I had a rifle to scope behind me.

As it turns out, the PST is a very good product, but it's no breakthrough that is without competition, in terms of glass quality.

When I compared my PST to my Nightforce, I didn't just sit there and look through them and say, "yeah, this one is brighter than that one." Glass quality goes even beyond that. If you look through both of them in bright sunlight in ideal conditions, it may be very hard to tell the difference. On the other hand, the differences become more apparent as the conditions become less than ideal, like when it isn't so bright out. Another thing to consider is the edge to edge clarity and amount of distortion, which become readily apparent under recoil.

I've decided not to put my PST on top of either of my .308s. I put mine on top of my 10/22 and have been getting to know it. The more I use it, the more I find that leads me to believe that I'll just be sticking with the Nightforce scopes for my more serious rifles.

For one thing, the eye relief on my PST changes drastically when I dial all the way down to 6X. It changes very drastically. Another thing I noticed is that when you dial in a lot of windage, like when shooting .22 at 100 yards in a 15 mph wind, things get screwy. Like I can't just look straight through the scope. I have to have my eye off axis to be able to get a sight picture.

Again, the PST is a nice scope, but it does have its shortcomings. My biggest concern is going to be dialing in elevation, which I haven't had to do much of, yet. My concern is that once I start really dialing in the elevation, I might get the same effect that I do when I dial in extreme windage. I don't know. I'll have to see.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

I agree that the PST's are not a breakthrough without peer in glass quality.


Nor were they designed to be.

They are however, everything I hoped they would be, and more.

I currently have 2 PST 6-24 mil FFP's. I previously had a 4-16 mil FFP and a 1-4 mil.

They are amazing optics, and would still be excellent optics at $2K in my opinion.

The fact that they can be had for ~$850 makes them a spectacular bargain. The glass is excellent. I am not saying they are better than my $2500 Schmidt's but they dont give up much.

The glass is excellent, the turrets have been perfect (on all of them) out to the ~700 yards I have tested them.

Fit and finish is <span style="font-style: italic">way</span> better than it ought to be for the price. That was the one thing I was concerned about. I assumed that I would have to deal with the lesser fit/finish of the sub $1K scopes. Not at all the case. The PST's is a high end optic.

The only question mark one can levy against them, if being fair, is the durability question. No way around it because they havent been fielded by the GP in large numbers for any length of time. That can only be alleviated by time.

Based on the durability of other Vortex optics that have been out, one has no reason to doubt them.

Additionally the Vortex warranty, that I know I hope to never need, is unsurpassed.

There is nothing any objective person will say negative about the overall value of the PST, and not many will complain about the level of overall quality of the scope in general. They are phenomenal and more than I expected, despite my high expectations based on every other Vortex product I have owned.

ETA- mine are mounted on a 20" APA bolt gun and a 16" LaRue semi in 7.62
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hawk45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Interesting how everything seems to always be about clarity and not durability or repeatability. Drop, bump or bang your rifle/optic and see how important that "clearer" glass is when you miss your next target by a foot or more. Clarity is but a very small factor in choosing an optic. </div></div>
I couldn't agree more!
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bacarrat</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hawk45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Interesting how everything seems to always be about clarity and not durability or repeatability. Drop, bump or bang your rifle/optic and see how important that "clearer" glass is when you miss your next target by a foot or more. Clarity is but a very small factor in choosing an optic. </div></div>

+1

I rather have a super reliable scope with decent glass then a scope with the best glass on earth with a marginal track record and spotty quality. </div></div>

Clarity is a bout #4 on my list....

Post back when your PST has been ran over, or you've had to take a wire brush to it to get granite out of the nooks and crannies after a fall.

At least they are looking promising, after a year of people seeing idiots post "I'd recommend you wait for the PST" its good to see some making it out ok.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

Please don't take this the wrong way - but I'm underwhelmed by the PST even at $899. I keep hearing how great they are for under $1000 and that what a great deal they are for half the price of a NF. By that logic, a Falcon 5-25 FFP is great glass for half the price of a PST. And I don't say that in jest.... I own a Falcon and I believe it is great glass for the money. Mine tracks just fine and I've had no problem making hits at 1k with it. Seeing hits on steel at 1k was no problem. So for double the price, what does a PST get me?

And before you flame me for being a budget scope fanboy - I also own a S&B PMII 5-25. I still think the Falcon is a great scope for the $$. I've looked through PSTs several times and I think they look great and are better than the Falcon, but I don't they they are double the Falcon's glass for double the money. I also like the Falcon's ML16 reticle better than the PSTs. The PST is too thick IMHO.

Ducking spears now......
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

I was going to buy a Falcon until I heard about the PST and decided to take a chance on one. I am not disappointed in my decision.

The other day I shot five 5 shot groups at 400 yds. and even though my 6-24x50mm PST FFP MOA scopes reticle is a little thick all of the groups measured between 2 inches and 2+3/8 inches which were the extreme spreads.

I don't know if I could have shot smaller groups with a much finer reticule.

40gt
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Notso</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ducking spears now...... </div></div>

I was looking at one of those 5-25 until a local guy showed me how great his was. The objective fell off while he was shooting it
frown.gif
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BCP</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Notso</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Ducking spears now...... </div></div>

I was looking at one of those 5-25 until a local guy showed me how great his was. The objective fell off while he was shooting it
frown.gif
</div></div>

I have never owned one of the Falcons, but have shot with one.

I have heard very mixed reviews on them, but if you get one that functions properly, there seem to be a decent amount of features for the money.

However, in my opinion, the glass is nowhere close, and the fit/finish and quality level is even further behind.

That is what has impressed me so much about the PST's. They didnt just pack all the features that the $2K+ optics have into a $850 scope. They did all that, while still maintaining a very high overall quality.

I think a lot of the guys who bash them, (at least the fair minded types, and there are more here than I think most guys give credit for) will change their opinions once they spend some time shooting one.

You cant blame the guys who have had to drop $2500 to get a scope that will do what they need. It just seems illogical that someone can bring a scope to market for $850 that simply doesnt give up much to the big boys.

I mean, these are still $850 scopes, and especially if lives depend on it, it is not easy to trust.

They will never be $2500 S&B's, but they will deliver nearly the same performance for guys who have a tough time dropping nearly 3K on glass. It opens up a whole lots of options.

That is why I think Vortex has done more for this community than any other optics mfg since they came on the scene.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

Sounds like the Falcon 5-25x isn't a one piece tube like the 4-14x?
I think if you buy a screw together scope just for more magnification you kind of deserve what you get.

Notsco's point is kind of reverse of what you normally see on these posts and I think he kind of hit on the problem these scopes present for higher dollar scopes and that is justification for the higher $$$ amount. The point he makes with the Falcon can also be made for the PST, and I think it is a valid one.

It will get even more interesting if/when the PST proves to be a rugged scope to boot, which I think it will.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

How is the eye relief on the PST's? IS it pretty fixed thoughout the magnification range or is it "in and out" like a Leupy?
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How is the eye relief on the PST's? IS it pretty fixed thoughout the magnification range or is it "in and out" like a Leupy? </div></div>

To be honest, I havent checked it out personally, beyond just shooting it every weekend.

I will do so. But, it is good enough that I havent noticed it, at all. Not something that has caught my attention, so even if after measuring it, I suppose that would only tell me that whatever the measurements are that they are within my levels of acceptability.

Will post back once I check it out.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hawk45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Interesting how everything seems to always be about clarity and not durability or repeatability. Drop, bump or bang your rifle/optic and see how important that "clearer" glass is when you miss your next target by a foot or more. Clarity is but a very small factor in choosing an optic. </div></div>

+1 I am looking forward to checking out the PST one of these days, great scope for the money. My Nightforce survived a roll over 3/19/11 while it was riding in the back of the truck with a quad and a bunch of steel targets. My friend Bill who also had his rifle in the back, scope survived too (also a NF). I believe it only shifted 1 MOA from its zero before the wreck.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JFComfort</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
+1 I am looking forward to checking out the PST one of these days, great scope for the money. My Nightforce survived a roll over 3/19/11 while it was riding in the back of the truck with a quad and a bunch of steel targets. My friend Bill who also had his rifle in the back, scope survived too (also a NF). I believe it only shifted 1 MOA from its zero before the wreck. </div></div>

let me know when your free, use away lol
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

I think the pst eye relief is the only bad thing I can say about them IMHO. I've only looked through one 6-24x50 pst. I felt it was worth the money once I looked through it, but it did change a lot in eye relief from 6x to 24x. To put it simply, I feel the PST is worth the money.
 
Re: Compared my PST to a NF.

I have not noticed any difference in the eye relief on my 6-24x50mm FFP MOA PST. I have an adjustable cheek piece which gives me very consistent cheek weld. That may make the difference with me.

40gt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Night Vision Day optic reticle is out of focus when paired with thermal clip-on
Replies
16
Views
417
mikefraz
M
hafejd30
ZCO527 vs NF ATACR 7-35 vs Arken EP5- (Last Light Comparison)
Replies
25
Views
2K
M8541Reaper
M8541Reaper
B
Anything better than PST Gen2 2-10x32 for under $1k?
Replies
32
Views
2K
AK264
A
Glassaholic
Rifle Scopes Steiner T6Xi 3-18x56 Review and comparison with NF ATACR 4-16x42, S&B US 3-20x50 and March 4.5-28x52
Replies
115
Views
5K
TheBigCountry
TheBigCountry
L
Looking for a better hunting scope for my rifle
Replies
71
Views
5K
Darayavaus
Darayavaus
Top Bottom
Back