Rifle Scopes Kahles K525i or NF ATACR F1

[Chief_Rick]

Looking at the K525i with SKMR3 reticle, NF ATACR F1 5-25 with MIL-XT reticle and the NF ATACR F1 7-35 with MIL-XT reticle.

If price were identical, which would you choose and why?

 

[blbennett1288]

NF 7-35 MIL-XT

The spacing on the K525 turrets is tight. Cosmetically the K525 is a really nice high end scope. The FOV is limited, not sure why Kahles went that route, but it is noticeable. The K525 has less CA than the K624. I really liked the SKMR3. I sold my K525 and don’t regret it one bit.

I have been using a 7-35 MIL-C for about a year now and really like it. The NF 7-35 F1 isn’t the “best” at anything but is a really well rounded scope. The turrets are good and I like how you can set the zero stop however much you want below zero. The clicks are tactile and audible. Spacing is good. Parallax is a little bit more picky than the ZP5 and TT I owned, not bad, just something you have to be conscious of at closer ranges. The glass is good, I’d put it a step behind TT/ZP5/ZCO, probably on par or slightly behind PMII, and ahead of the K525.

I don’t own a MIL-XT, but one of the guys I shoot with does and I think it is a really well thought out and well executed reticle. It is a lot less cluttered in person, the dots really disappear unless you are specifically looking for or need them.

 

[Chief_Rick]

NF 7-35 MIL-XT

The spacing on the K525 turrets is tight. Cosmetically the K525 is a really nice high end scope. The FOV is limited, not sure why Kahles went that route, but it is noticeable. The K525 has less CA than the K624. I really liked the SKMR3. I sold my K525 and don’t regret it one bit.

I have been using a 7-35 MIL-C for about a year now and really like it. The NF 7-35 F1 isn’t the “best” at anything but is a really well rounded scope. The turrets are good and I like how you can set the zero stop however much you want below zero. The clicks are tactile and audible. Spacing is good. Parallax is a little bit more picky than the ZP5 and TT I owned, not bad, just something you have to be conscious of at closer ranges. The glass is good, I’d put it a step behind TT/ZP5/ZCO, probably on par or slightly behind PMII, and ahead of the K525.

I don’t own a MIL-XT, but one of the guys I shoot with does and I think it is a really well thought out and well executed reticle. It is a lot less cluttered in person, the dots really disappear unless you are specifically looking for or need them.

Thank you.

 

[Chief_Rick]

Well, I was just offered a heck of a deal on a Leupold MK5 7-35 with CCH reticle. It'll be significantly less than I've seen either the Kahles or the NF, even used. It's non-illuminated, but that's a whole lot of ammo.

 

[longshot2000]

The Mark 5 is a good scope. I would seriously search your requirements before committing to a non-illumniated scope. The Mark 5 has been used recently with some Army sniper weapons, which is a good vote of confidence.

My vote is on Nightforce ATACR, or at least get the illuminated Mark 5. Most of our customers who buy a non-illuminated scope come back in under 6 months dissapointed and want to trade up. Even the basic TMR illuminated Mark 5 is worth the price upgrade.

Let me know if I can help. We sell both Leupold and Nightforce, and a little Kahles.

 

[Chief_Rick]

Thank you sir. I will sit on this for a while longer and look for more reviews Will allow me to try to save some more money.