Rifle Scopes New high power Nightforce NX8?
- Thread starter acg
- Start date
I'll have to check my box again!
I love shooting long range and have only in the past couple of years gotten to the point where I could afford descent equipment. I have never shot competitively but am considering getting into PRS (if that 4 letter word WORK will quit getting in the way). I was trying to decide between ATACR 7-35 or a Razor 4.5-27, then I came across this NX8. Now I'm really torn. I know I don't need anything more than 20-25x for PRS but I also shoot prairie dogs with this rifle from time to time. I recently got to shoot a few at about 1k. Right now the rifle wears a Vortex Golden Eagle but I really don't like it due to the starting mag of 15X. It's just too hard to find those little boogers in the scope when they are 100 yds away. With all this said, and now that a few folks have gotten to play with the NX8, which of these 3 would you suggest?
If weight is not an issue for you the ATACR and Razor Gen II are most likely going to have the better glass overall along with more forgiving DOF and parallax which you might find convenient when hunting prairie dogs that are smattered about the landscape. The 7-35 has a track record of having the best glass that NF offers.
If you're considering those two. And have the budget 7-35 all day and twice on sunday. No questions asked.
Are there weight limits in PRS?
I got behind an NX8 4-32 briefly today. I really wanted to like this scope and planned to buy one when it came out in mil-XT, now I'm going to make myself revisit it before committing.
Went to a 1000 range today with fairly heavy mirage. I had a Steiner T5xi and Minox ZP5 with me. I thought the overall image with the Steiner beat out the NX8. I could make out the rocks on the 1000 yard berm and hits on target better with the Steiner. CA on my particular T5xi isn't as bad as others have reported with theirs. ZP5 outclassed both.
It may not have been an entirely fair comparison, so I will have to revisit the NX8. Diopter was not adjusted for me, although I think it was close, reticle was very sharp for me. He was shooting it on a .308 and had 11.5ish mils dialed in. If he was running a flat base, he would have been pretty far off optical center. My Steiner was on my .223 and only had 8.6 mils dialed in and a 20 MOA base, so it wasn't too far from optical center. Even though I was looking at them side by side, mirage was quite heavy, its possible the Steiner just cuts through it slightly better.
Either way, the Steiner T5xi is not exactly known for having the best glass, so I was a bit surprised the overall image was noticeably better. I'm still interested in picking up the 2.5-20, I just want to look through one first. Seems the Mil-XT version is still coming though so I have time.
Went to a 1000 range today with fairly heavy mirage. I had a Steiner T5xi and Minox ZP5 with me. I thought the overall image with the Steiner beat out the NX8. I could make out the rocks on the 1000 yard berm and hits on target better with the Steiner. CA on my particular T5xi isn't as bad as others have reported with theirs. ZP5 outclassed both.
It may not have been an entirely fair comparison, so I will have to revisit the NX8. Diopter was not adjusted for me, although I think it was close, reticle was very sharp for me. He was shooting it on a .308 and had 11.5ish mils dialed in. If he was running a flat base, he would have been pretty far off optical center. My Steiner was on my .223 and only had 8.6 mils dialed in and a 20 MOA base, so it wasn't too far from optical center. Even though I was looking at them side by side, mirage was quite heavy, its possible the Steiner just cuts through it slightly better.
Either way, the Steiner T5xi is not exactly known for having the best glass, so I was a bit surprised the overall image was noticeably better. I'm still interested in picking up the 2.5-20, I just want to look through one first. Seems the Mil-XT version is still coming though so I have time.
Today was not a dealbreaker for me, I just need to revisit it. Conditions weren't great. Also there has been a lot of variation in different T5xi scopes. Mine is a later build and has been pretty good.
Last edited:
Lenny, I found adjusting the diopter was very finicky for me, I had to mess with it quite a while, one reason is that it is not the fast focus type so you have to do lots of spinning. I also had a T5Xi and my biggest complaint was CA, but resolution was quite impressive. I have the NX8 2.5-20 so the 4-32 might be a different animal optically.
So this wierd circle thing showed up in my scope today, any idea what this is? It's only visible at 2.5.
Lol looks like a thread protector. What MOA base are you running?
It's a lot clearer in the picture versus looking through the scope... Okay I'm totally dumb on that one ?
It's the latest and greatest wiz bang co-witness setting.
Got my nx8 2.5-20 mounted up today.
First I tried it on my ax308 so I could compare it to my atacr 5-25. The smaller size is nice. It feels significantly lighter. The illumination is very easy to see in the brightest time of day. The parallax seems pretty forgiving. And probably my favorite thing is the eye piece doesn't rotate as you change magnification.
The colors in ATACR do pop a little more. The image is a little better (not much) The finish on the tube of the atacr is better as well.
After playing at the range I decided to throw it on my 300wsm hunting rifle. It replaced a Leupold vx5hd and I like it alot more. I have it mounted in tally lightweight rings for now. Mounted in the medium rings there was only about .02mm clearance so had to swap to high rings.
I think overall I'm pretty happy with it.
First I tried it on my ax308 so I could compare it to my atacr 5-25. The smaller size is nice. It feels significantly lighter. The illumination is very easy to see in the brightest time of day. The parallax seems pretty forgiving. And probably my favorite thing is the eye piece doesn't rotate as you change magnification.
The colors in ATACR do pop a little more. The image is a little better (not much) The finish on the tube of the atacr is better as well.
After playing at the range I decided to throw it on my 300wsm hunting rifle. It replaced a Leupold vx5hd and I like it alot more. I have it mounted in tally lightweight rings for now. Mounted in the medium rings there was only about .02mm clearance so had to swap to high rings.
I think overall I'm pretty happy with it.
Mine had something funky going on in that exact spot. Wasn't dark like that, but definitely a distorted view. Mine happened between about 4x-16x. It's currently with NF, thought I'd have it back by now.
Edit: just re-read your post. Misunderstood what you were saying. The end of my barrel pops into view at low power as well.
Last edited:
Check out this thread for some answers on that very question - https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/leupold-mk5-or-nightforce-nx8-for-ar10.6956751/
i think the hardest part of this is it seems most have the 2.5-20 which serves a much different purchase than a RzrG2
The NX8 is a different animal compared to the Razor Gen II or Athlon Cronus. The $2k value of the NX8 comes from the fact that it is an 8x erector scope in a short body and light weight. The only scope you mention above that would come remotely close would be the Burris XTR III design as it too is shorter and lighter weight and while the XTR III uses a 7x erector they only use 5.5x of it within their magnification of 3.3-18. The Midas Tac would be in a much lower tier due to price point.
NEW NX8 RETICLES
Finally the reticles that a bunch of guys have been asking about are becoming available - check out the 4 new versions:
2.5-20 Mil-XT
2.5-20 Tremor 3
4-32 Mil-XT
4-32 Tremor 3
These are supposed to be available well before the end of the year! Preorders happening now!
Finally the reticles that a bunch of guys have been asking about are becoming available - check out the 4 new versions:
2.5-20 Mil-XT
2.5-20 Tremor 3
4-32 Mil-XT
4-32 Tremor 3
These are supposed to be available well before the end of the year! Preorders happening now!
Last edited:
If you don't need the very low and high range, then no.
Now that I have a production model XTR3 in hand and have had a couple range trips with it, I suspect it's going to a strong competitor in an across the board, apples to apples comparison. The SCR2 is a good reticle for anyone who likes the MIL-XT.
Granted, the NX8 will win over buyers because it says Nightforce on the side. They have well earned brand loyalty. But the with the Burris coming in $300 to $400 less money, and being a feature rich optic, I think it will win over some scope buyers.
I'll let you guys decide how well they stack up when more people are able to put them side by side. Maybe @wjm308 and @D_TROS will get together in Colorado and do a side by side soon.
That's the plan, just not sure when...
??????
Make that $1755, from Mile High Shooting, using their first time customer discount code, just FYI.
Great unless you've been shopping with them for 5 or 10 years ha
Find a buddy...make him a new customer....voila!
Is that for the NX8 4-32 Moar?
No, the 2.5-20, but you could get 10% off that one with their new customer code.
Can also call any number of vendors that offer hide pricing. Doug us great. CS Tactical. mile high. Etc
I'll probably get flamed for this, but what the hell.
Shot a practical 22lr match this weekend and to my surprise a guy in my squad had a 4-32 NX8 (they only arrived in the country a few days earlier), so got too have a bit of a play, not a comprehensive test by any means. Conditons were slightly over cast and only had targets out too 200m.
The glass seemed nice but didn't blow me away, the FOV was pretty good but the scope tunneled from 4x to about 6x, I didn't notice any issue with depth of field but the parallax needed frequent adjustment when moving between targets from about 40m out to 200m, which wasn't surprising. The eyebox didn't feel particularly sensitive but I wasn't using it a huge amount on 32x.
The turret clicks were very audible but the feel didn't blow me away, nothing wrong with them just not ground breaking.
I likes the Mil C reticle, it was well sized for the zoom range but definitely very fine of 4x, still usable in good lighting but I wouldn't want to used it in low light or a dark background (with illumination).
Overall I quite liked it but I wasn't blown away, I was shooting with my Vortex PST 5-25 and didn't feel like I was giving up much too be honest, though I didn't sit there for hours comparing them side by side. The FOV felt on par as well as the glass wasn't a night and day improvement, the turrets were a lot more audible on the NX8 but the click tactility was only marginally better.
I did like the throw lever though, so should probably invest in one for the PST.
As I said I liked the NX8 and felt it to be a usable scope but I didn't feel the urge to rush out and by one, the price for me would be 3800NZD whereas my PST cost me 1500NZD. For 2.5x the price I don't feel like the scope would've helped me score any better for the day which was a bit of a let down, maybe under different conditions it may have excelled who knows.
Shot a practical 22lr match this weekend and to my surprise a guy in my squad had a 4-32 NX8 (they only arrived in the country a few days earlier), so got too have a bit of a play, not a comprehensive test by any means. Conditons were slightly over cast and only had targets out too 200m.
The glass seemed nice but didn't blow me away, the FOV was pretty good but the scope tunneled from 4x to about 6x, I didn't notice any issue with depth of field but the parallax needed frequent adjustment when moving between targets from about 40m out to 200m, which wasn't surprising. The eyebox didn't feel particularly sensitive but I wasn't using it a huge amount on 32x.
The turret clicks were very audible but the feel didn't blow me away, nothing wrong with them just not ground breaking.
I likes the Mil C reticle, it was well sized for the zoom range but definitely very fine of 4x, still usable in good lighting but I wouldn't want to used it in low light or a dark background (with illumination).
Overall I quite liked it but I wasn't blown away, I was shooting with my Vortex PST 5-25 and didn't feel like I was giving up much too be honest, though I didn't sit there for hours comparing them side by side. The FOV felt on par as well as the glass wasn't a night and day improvement, the turrets were a lot more audible on the NX8 but the click tactility was only marginally better.
I did like the throw lever though, so should probably invest in one for the PST.
As I said I liked the NX8 and felt it to be a usable scope but I didn't feel the urge to rush out and by one, the price for me would be 3800NZD whereas my PST cost me 1500NZD. For 2.5x the price I don't feel like the scope would've helped me score any better for the day which was a bit of a let down, maybe under different conditions it may have excelled who knows.
That's a pretty fair assessment. I have the 2.5-20 and think it hits the marks it was trying too without costing too much. The glass isn't ATACR quality, but I dont think it was ment to compete with them.
I did get a chance to get mine in the field for hunting. I was trying to get some camp meat for deer camp and was able to go 2 for 2 on head shots on deer at 25yds. I was concerned about the thin crosshairs on 2.5x, but it worked just fine on a couple pretty quick shots.
I did get a chance to get mine in the field for hunting. I was trying to get some camp meat for deer camp and was able to go 2 for 2 on head shots on deer at 25yds. I was concerned about the thin crosshairs on 2.5x, but it worked just fine on a couple pretty quick shots.
Nothing wrong with that at all, we all have different preferences. I think the point that Beet makes above is simply that it is a good scope, but does have some drawbacks and as long as you understand what those are (finicky DOF/Parallax/Eyebox and some loss of edge clarity) then you very well may like it a lot. I lived with the March for a while that way and thought the other cool features would overcome but in the end having to play so much with the parallax just bugged me. I'll be taking my NX8 2.5-20 out soon to do some more shooting with it.
I played with a 2.5-20 today at the expo. I loved it. I will say that I am not as picky as some of my buddies when it comes to glass. There’s a lot of differences they see in scopes that I just don’t. Everyone’s eyes are different I guess. That said I didn’t see anything that would keep me from buying one. It’s exactly what I’ve been wanting.
I don't really think glass is one of its shortcomings. The glass looks pretty good to me having looked and spent some time on both the 20x and 32x.
The issues that WJM mentions are there. I've seen them on all three of the NX8s I have looked at. It's not anything that is really going to show itself indoors. Except perhaps for the fisheye on the edges. But the eyebox is definitely tight, and reducing parallax takes some tweaking.
For some people these may not be issues at all. If you're not shooting on the clock and you enjoy the scope, run with it.
The issues that WJM mentions are there. I've seen them on all three of the NX8s I have looked at. It's not anything that is really going to show itself indoors. Except perhaps for the fisheye on the edges. But the eyebox is definitely tight, and reducing parallax takes some tweaking.
For some people these may not be issues at all. If you're not shooting on the clock and you enjoy the scope, run with it.
I shot it out to 815 today and still did not notice the fisheye or picky parallax. Not saying it’s not there, I just can’t see it. I did notice a bit of tight eye box. Field of view is great.
I went back 3x today and yesterday looking at both versions to make sure. Looked at targets from 25 yards to 1000. Some people may see the negatives but I don’t think they are as pronounced as one might think.
Last edited:
I'm old and my eyes are supposedly good (20/20) but the reticle at low power was next to useless even with the illumination on. I guess I was reminded of why I can't stand FFP scopes. I know most people on the Hide like FFP but I can't seem to get used to it. Other than that it's an outstanding piece of kit as the Aussies would say. 
I traded it for a SFP ATACR and am happy as a clam now...
I traded it for a SFP ATACR and am happy as a clam now...
interested in your thoughts about the x20 vs x32, pros and cons?
My take on magnification is that the middle of the range is usually the clearest? I could be wrong but that's what I've picked up.
I didn’t spend a lot of time with the 32x. Mainly played with it on 4x and ran it up to 20 once. I didn’t see any difference than the 2.5-20 so I went back to it since it’s the one I’m interested in.
Does Mile High Shooting actually have a first time customer discount? I'm just getting started in long range rifle (how I ended up here) and am in the market to pick up some gear. The post from @Centuriator caught my eye, but looks like he might have been banned since then.
Call mile high.
I am curious if the 4-32 shows less edge distortion than the 2.5-20 due to the longer scope body. Do you recall if it seemed about the same between both scopes RF?
They both looked the same to me. Your view might be different though as it is with the 20x.
