Nightforce Atacr 4-20 x50

jeffl838

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Feb 20, 2013
881
407
Apparently you haven’t looked through one. Very finicky Eyebox and parallax, significant edge distortion, mushy turrets. What I did like - center resolution was impressive, reticles and illumination. I agree, it is a “neat” scope, but it just does not compete with other scopes at its price point and even less for the above mentioned parameters.
The eyebox is definitely tight and there's definitely edge distortion. I thought the center resolution and usable low magnification made up for it, since I saw it as more of an SPR kinda thing, considering the price point. What do you think outclasses it at similar or lower price points? What do you mean by finicky parallax?
 

Sprayed99

WJK 4-9-18
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Jan 9, 2012
    1,315
    430
    DFW TX
    The eyebox is definitely tight and there's definitely edge distortion. I thought the center resolution and usable low magnification made up for it, since I saw it as more of an SPR kinda thing, considering the price point. What do you think outclasses it at similar or lower price points? What do you mean by finicky parallax?
    I have messed with both NX8's the 2.5x20 has an extremely finicky parallax, now the 4-32 is definitely an improvement. Same can be said for the edge distortion. The 4-32 just worked out better in the end. My wife shoots it now, I don't really have a place for an optic over 20x. well... I'b say more like 24-26 ish power. The 4-32 gets rather dim up top.
     

    gnochi

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    May 6, 2019
    858
    584
    Orange County, CA
    the fact that FOV is even worse at the low end baffles me (unless they did this to eliminate edge distortion)

    Never really understood why someone would make that trade off. A partially distorted field of view that’s not anywhere near the aiming point is much better than a field of view that’s cut off inboard of the distortion for every application I can think of except perhaps benchrest.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: deersniper

    jeffl838

    Private
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 20, 2013
    881
    407
    I have messed with both NX8's the 2.5x20 has an extremely finicky parallax, now the 4-32 is definitely an improvement. Same can be said for the edge distortion. The 4-32 just worked out better in the end. My wife shoots it now, I don't really have a place for an optic over 20x. well... I'b say more like 24-26 ish power. The 4-32 gets rather dim up top.
    I'm not agreeing or disagreeing about finicky parallax, i'm asking for it to be defined so we're talking on the same page
     

    Sprayed99

    WJK 4-9-18
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jan 9, 2012
    1,315
    430
    DFW TX
    I'm not agreeing or disagreeing about finicky parallax, i'm asking for it to be defined so we're talking on the same page
    Ok,

    What I have experienced with the 5 samples of NX8s that I have had through my hands. Both 2.5-20 models had a very narrow window. in other words going from 50 to 100 to 400 to 800 and anywhere in between took much more "fiddling" with the knob to be parallax free. In fact far more than any optic I have had in my hands in the last 3-4 years. Now the 4-32 is a good bit better, I would equate it to a Vortex Razor AMG <<(when they actually work correctly).
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Secant

    Glassaholic

    Send it!
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 30, 2012
    5,251
    4,249
    Black Forest, CO
    The eyebox is definitely tight and there's definitely edge distortion. I thought the center resolution and usable low magnification made up for it, since I saw it as more of an SPR kinda thing, considering the price point. What do you think outclasses it at similar or lower price points? What do you mean by finicky parallax?
    This is really a debate for another thread, but I will touch on "finicky parallax". My definition is as follows: requires minute adjustments between short distances to get the image in proper focus and the reticle to be parallax free.

    Whereas a “forgiving” parallax requires little to no adjustment between both short and long distances. These scopes I consider to almost be “set it and forget it” designs.

    When I think of the NX8 2.5-20 design I think of this scope as both a tactical and crossover design, for tactical applications with dynamic shooting at multiple targets at varying ranges, the finicky parallax will come back to bite you whereas the crossover use may not be so much of an issue rather than an annoyance.

    I expect the ATACR 4-20 to do very well in this regard following in the footsteps of the highly regarded 7-35 design.
     

    Glassaholic

    Send it!
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 30, 2012
    5,251
    4,249
    Black Forest, CO
    Never really understood why someone would make that trade off. A partially distorted field of view that’s not anywhere near the aiming point is much better than a field of view that’s cut off inboard of the distortion for every application I can think of except perhaps benchrest.
    You make that “trade off” with every scope. Whether it be the eyepiece or the field stop, the manufacturer has made a decision regarding the FOV. I can see that some may prefer a wider FOV with a distorted image, but my eyes fatigue quickly when I see stuff dancing around at the edges like a funhouse mirror, and if you decide to “hold” for distance this could affect your POI.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: RHutch and gnochi

    StopMakingSense

    Sheep & Elk
    Supporter
    Minuteman
  • Jan 15, 2021
    42
    4
    SLC, UT
    I just signed up because this scope is coming out. I have some gift cards hanging out and a 2.5-20x50 F1 MilC NX8 I'm thinking of selling. I'm huge on my optics, Swarovski is all I use, NL10x42's and an STX95.

    I like the NX8 but felt I needed more. It's going to be used on my hunting rifle (300 PRC, 22", 215 Bergers) and don't mind a heavier rifle as I value good optics. It Will also be exchanged onto a 6mm I intend to start with some local PRS this year.

    It just seems like a great scope. What's the collective's thoughts on it for me in particular?
     

    RTV

    Rock the Vote
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 30, 2019
    302
    174
    I just signed up because this scope is coming out. I have some gift cards hanging out and a 2.5-20x50 F1 MilC NX8 I'm thinking of selling. I'm huge on my optics, Swarovski is all I use, NL10x42's and an STX95.

    I like the NX8 but felt I needed more. It's going to be used on my hunting rifle (300 PRC, 22", 215 Bergers) and don't mind a heavier rifle as I value good optics. It Will also be exchanged onto a 6mm I intend to start with some local PRS this year.

    It just seems like a great scope. What's the collective's thoughts on it for me in particular?

    Simple especially if you are a firm believer in "buy once cry once" as am i.

    The ZCO 420 is superior in every way on the spec sheet and no one here thinks the NF will be able to compete optically either as ZCO is right up there with Tangent Theta and HensoldI.


    With that being said I am almost 100% certain my next optic will be a NF 4-16x42 with a piggyback RMR. But thats for an AR15 and I know i am sacrificing optical capability for a compact format factor and lightish weight (30oz)
     

    jzerfoss

    Sergeant of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 29, 2019
    330
    138
    WV and VA
    This thread is going in a weird direction... 1: Since when is $500 cheaper MSRP considered the same price range when comparing to the ZCO 420? Especially since no one that's not extremely lazy pays full MSRP for NF. Not to mention why even bring up the NX8 since it's not even close the same price range or specs of either.

    2: If you are going to compare the NF to a realistically $6-700 more expensive optic the only 2 things the NF is lacking in is FOV at the lowest magnification and a bit of length. You can't compare the scopes optically since no one has actually compared them. So if you want to pay the extra for those 2 to things then so be it. There are other obvious differences between the scopes but those would be more personal preferences than "worse" specs.

    I think everyone is thinking this scope is a direct shot a the ZCO when more realistically its actually more like a lighter, more compact, more useable mag range(for some people), and more affordable version of the 7-35. Even if it is a direct shot at the ZCO 420 I'm sure that the price to benefit ratio will actually steer more buyers towards NF as long as the glass turns out to be as good or better as the 7-35.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: BallisticPrimate

    SharpsNitro

    Full Member
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 22, 2013
    828
    279
    Arizona
    For people wishing this scope were lighter, and cheaper, it’s very similar to the Element Nexus. The NF has more elevation but is 7oz heavier and costs twice as much.
     

    SRPowah

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 13, 2017
    928
    380
    Black Hills SoDak
    This thread is going in a weird direction... 1: Since when is $500 cheaper MSRP considered the same price range when comparing to the ZCO 420? Especially since no one that's not extremely lazy pays full MSRP for NF. Not to mention why even bring up the NX8 since it's not even close the same price range or specs of either.
    Optics have always been grouped into rough price tiers. The more expensive you get, the wider the group as the people who are willing to drop the coin typically can save a little more to justify the performance boost. If you are comparing a $400 optic to an $800 optic, that $400 represents a huge 200% divide. When comparing a $3000 street priced optic to a $3600 street priced optic, saving another 20% for a proven top tier optic is both reasonable and worth it. I wouldn't be surprised if the NF's MSRP is closer to $3500. I am yet to pay even street price for a NF, but that is because someone had to bite the bullet and buy it new at some point before me.

    The NX8 is brought up because everyone was hoping for a Nightforce branded replacement to that mag range without as much finicky optical issues. It could of easily been the step up compromise between the 2.5-20x and 4-16x.
     
    • Love
    Reactions: RTV

    RTV

    Rock the Vote
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 30, 2019
    302
    174
    Perfectly said @SRPowah

    The only thing I would add is that NF products don't typically go down in street price with age. NF is typically pretty strict on their pricing and keeping it where they set it.
     

    ma smith

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 29, 2020
    619
    327
    IMHO Reasons for missed shots on actual targets:

    1) No See um ....No optic/optic failure (too expensive to afford, always in shop for repairs)
    2) Bad dope... mechanical error tracking (garbage in=garbage out)
    3) Slow Speed .... too slow to acquire sight picture (good eyebox, FOV, not finicky focus /depth/parallax adj)
    4) Hold error....sight picture confusing (reticle design/visibility/lighting/resolution)

    (feel free to chime in with your own ranking/critique)

    NF seem to be disproportionately popular to their optica IQ because they don't fail in the field all that much. The glass doesn't matter if the package doesn't put rounds on target. Alternatively, ultimate IQ is rarely a deciding variable to shot placement.

    ZCO is like a slightly higher grade version of NF, they also are focused on usability and overall good balance vs ultiamate IQ. The compelling thing about 4-20zco right now is its lack of obvious weaknesses.
     
    Last edited:

    StopMakingSense

    Sheep & Elk
    Supporter
    Minuteman
  • Jan 15, 2021
    42
    4
    SLC, UT
    Max price point was 3k and the NF was the obvious contender coming in. Was I going to pay full retail? No.

    The ZCO 420 is the obvious choice but used models and what I’ll guess are lack of any discounts for this scope from any online retailer put it in a different 1k+ bracket to me.

    The Kahles steps in with some small discounts and no tax buying from a retailer online. Or finding a used one for ~2800.

    IQ is very important to me when hunting and I trust Swarovski with this. IQ is also something I just enjoy. I love good optics.

    The NX8 2.5-20 was lack luster and I had a problem with the zero stop clutch not disengaging. The scope is with Nightforce now getting fixed. It left a bit of a sour taste in my mouth for NF. I’ve had the pleasure of using the SHV, NXS, and now the NX8 in field use. I was just never wow’ed by NF.

    This thread backs up what my possible assumption could be on an ATACR of the IQ. I’d love to own an ATACR but being a tester of a new scope and my knowledge of loving the Swarovski IQ (contrast, color rendition, CA, sharpness) all lead me to a Kahles in the market of the short scopes that 4-20x50 ATACR seems to fit itself in.
     
    Last edited:

    koshkin

    Dark Lord Of Optics
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 22, 2006
    3,834
    5,187
    New Mexico
    www.opticsthoughts.com
    Interesting discussion as always.

    A couple of things to note: best I can tell, noone in this thread has seen or tested the new Nightforce scope (I have not either), so I probably would not make too many conclusions based on specs alone. Besides, it is not uncommon to see spec errors as well.

    I generally like ATACR scopes, although I have to admit I liked them more when the price was at $3k or under across the board.

    It will be interesting to see how it stacks up.

    ILya
     

    Shootnwrench

    Iceman
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 25, 2020
    185
    232
    Soldotna AK
    To prove Koshkin’s point. Their website initially showed it listed as 30mm tube. Now it’s 34 as the rest of the family.
     

    beetroot

    Major Hide Member
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 10, 2018
    1,364
    1,089
    I'll be interested to see if it's a "tank" like every other NF scope, as that is all that really matters.
    Don't want no assault gun masquerading like it's a for actual tank, if ya know what I mean.
     

    JB.IC

    Jackass of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 25, 2019
    600
    338
    The ATACR 4-20x in my opinion is an upgrade compared to the 5-25x ATACR because of the parallax and FOV. I was initially thinking since the 4-20x and the 5-25x were so similar in price that why would anyone want the 4-20x but I’ve since considered that on paper it’s a better scope. You don’t gain much with the extra x5 but you do gain a bit of FOV with the 4x and the parallax can go down to 11yds. Basically the 4-20x fits more roles while being a tad shorter and a tad lighter. Definitely a possible scope for my PRS rifle as I may take off the 7-35x ATACR and put it on an ELR rifle.
     

    ma smith

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 29, 2020
    619
    327
    IMHO ATACR optics are "good enough" as a package that its more about usability/ergos and personal preferences. With that said, has anyone used this new SKU as a demo? I'd like to see some test reports/range reviews. Especially on the parallax ! That will show how much work they really did on the optical system.
     

    pwrdbycotn

    Private
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Mar 2, 2014
    28
    9
    Missouri
    I put in an order for one today. I’m one of those MOA dinosaurs that you rarely see these days. I needed a scope and this one checked most all the boxes for me. I’m excited to look through it.
     

    Bigrederic

    Sergeant of the Hide
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 22, 2018
    342
    448
    SE Alaska
    I put in an order for one today. I’m one of those MOA dinosaurs that you rarely see these days. I needed a scope and this one checked most all the boxes for me. I’m excited to look through it.
    Mile High told me they had some MOA and Tremor 3 models last week.
     

    pwrdbycotn

    Private
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Mar 2, 2014
    28
    9
    Missouri
    I'm hoping this one does not have the rotating ocular lol...
    It does. I just got home and opened it up and took it outside for a look around. Ocular turns with mag ring, and based on this one thing I’m probably going to be returning it.
     

    Chasing3

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 18, 2017
    656
    181
    Frisco, TX
    Wonder if they will offer a SFP model with the new SFP MRAD reticle that the NX8’s offer instead of the Mil-R
     

    pwrdbycotn

    Private
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Mar 2, 2014
    28
    9
    Missouri
    Why is this such a problem for people? The only possibility I can come up with is more choice of scope caps. The NF is awesome when wearing gloves here in winter, even without a cattail.
    What good does it do? For the life of me, I can’t figure out why this is a good thing.