• 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 Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 - Initial Thoughts

Millron said:
Thats funny you posted this. Ive got a 2.5-20 and have never really noticed the edge distrotion some complain about, maybe thats why. Parallex is a little finicky and its a little tougher to get behind than some longer optics but far from bad if used on a properly set up rifle. Life is a series of compromises and lower entry price and short design are two of them. For what it is ive always thought it was a very decent scope. Recently acquired a couple XTR3 3-18s for use om rimfire. I really like them except for stiff mag ring and parallex and no illumination. I think the nx8 has an edge in glass quality but the xtr3 is easier to get behind and i love the eyebox/fov and thats why im running them on coyote rifle and rimfire setup.
Click to expand...
It makes me wish I could get at least 2-3 copies of a scope for a review, but all my reviews are pro bono and I have to pay for the scopes out of my own pocket usually and since I'm not loaded and Biden's inflation is killing me, well it gets limiting. I would concur with your assessment on the NX8 and XTR III.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deersniper and Millron
Have you noticed any variation in the NX8 4-32? I have three of them and they all seem identical to my eyes......but I'll preface that with I'm not that very picky with optics. Not sure my eyes are good enough to see subtle differences. Optically they are better than the 2.5-20s and better than the XTR III, but not ATACR level glass. I wish Nightforce would have stuck the 2.5-20 in that same Scope body as the 4-32 and made a 3-24 option in lieu of the 2.5-20 , in conjunction with a little bit bolder outer stadia on the FFP reticles. winner winner chicken dinner IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Earnhardt and Chasing3
With so many complaints about the tight eye box, how does this scope compare to a Bushnell 3-12 or 4.5-18 LRTS/LRHS? I find those eyeboxes to be pretty picky but not necessarily a hindrance.
 
Glassaholic said:
It makes me wish I could get at least 2-3 copies of a scope for a review, but all my reviews are pro bono and I have to pay for the scopes out of my own pocket usually and since I'm not loaded and Biden's inflation is killing me, well it gets limiting. I would concur with your assessment on the NX8 and XTR III.
Click to expand...
I bet if you asked ppl like me would send you scopes
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thorbeast
Curious how the current 2.5-20 and 4-32 stack up?

I’m looking for a short scope for a switch barrel rifle. Everything from 308 to 338 LM so the wide mag range is really nice. Oh and I shoot at night too… my gut tells me the 2.5-20 version is what I’m after but the 4-32 seems to be more forgiving in the DOF / parallax department (which is very nice at night).

To benchmark, I have MK5’s in 5-25 and 3.6-18 at the moment and I like them both but the 5-25 is just too long. I don’t often crank to 25x but when I do I’m glad I have it (but on the other hand don’t miss it with the 3.6-18 haha)
 
Jgrovem110 said:
How was the eye box on an ar platform I was considering putting one on a similar platform?
Click to expand...
The 2.5-20 F1 is an effective scope for the ar platform. I have 4 of those scopes. 2 with the mil c and 2 with the mil xt. I have zero issues with the eye box. The only thing is you have to adjust parallax frequently if above 16x.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rlsmith1
rlsmith1 said:
Curious how the current 2.5-20 and 4-32 stack up?

I’m looking for a short scope for a switch barrel rifle. Everything from 308 to 338 LM so the wide mag range is really nice. Oh and I shoot at night too… my gut tells me the 2.5-20 version is what I’m after but the 4-32 seems to be more forgiving in the DOF / parallax department (which is very nice at night).

To benchmark, I have MK5’s in 5-25 and 3.6-18 at the moment and I like them both but the 5-25 is just too long. I don’t often crank to 25x but when I do I’m glad I have it (but on the other hand don’t miss it with the 3.6-18 haha)
Click to expand...
I run 4 of the 2.5-20 F1 on ARs and 2 of the 4-32 F1 on bolt guns. The 2.5-20 is the best scope for a huge FOV. The 4-32 is a really nice setup for bolt actions. The parallax needs adjustment more on the top end of both models. When guys run the 2.5 up to 16x and the 4 up to 24x they are rarely bothered by this aspect. For stationary targets max power is fine. If shooting at night the 4-32 could benefit from a 56mm objective if going up to higher magnifications. I have the mk5 in 5-25 and it has a slight edge at night for light gathering with equal magnification around 20x. At around 16x they are basically the same. The light on the nightforce reticle is way better for my eyes though so that kind of makes it a draw. A couple nights ago I was able to still shoot clover size groups with a 4-32 set at 20x on white paper and a sharpie marker x with just moon light at 100 yards. The 2.5-20 does 0-500 yards really well, while the 4-32 is nice for 300-1000 yards. Both you can take out to a mile but scopes like the ATACR 7-35 are better for that application.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Earnhardt and rlsmith1
sawman556 said:
I didn't like the 2520 on my B14R. Replaced it with the 432 today and like it much better for a .22. The 20x will go on one of my AR's.
Click to expand...
What exactly didn’t you like on the bolt gun? The 2.5x low end is appealing for clip on use to me
 
  • Like
Reactions: BurtG
rlsmith1 said:
What exactly didn’t you like on the bolt gun? The 2.5x low end is appealing for clip on use to me
Click to expand...

For some reason I had a really hard time getting behind that scope. That's even with the adjustable cheek piece and LOP on my Xylo chassis. I always felt like I was fighting that scope. I moved it numerous times trying to get the eye relief right without success. I'm no expert, but I've been shooting most of my life so IDK. I also found the 2.5x rather useless. It works better with the illumination on, but it's not daylight bright so it can really only be used in lowlight. I spend a lot of time behind my .22 so it was driving me crazy. No joy! It's going on an AR-15 and if I still hate it, it's going down the road. I've had the 432 for a day and I'm much happier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wildcats and rlsmith1
sawman556 said:
For some reason I had a really hard time getting behind that scope. That's even with the adjustable cheek piece and LOP on my Xylo chassis. I always felt like I was fighting that scope. I moved it numerous times trying to get the eye relief right without success. I'm no expert, but I've been shooting most of my life so IDK. I also found the 2.5x rather useless. It works better with the illumination on, but it's not daylight bright so it can really only be used in lowlight. I spend a lot of time behind my .22 so it was driving me crazy. No joy! It's going on an AR-15 and if I still hate it, it's going down the road. I've had the 432 for a day and I'm much happier.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the input. I’ll have to find a shop that carries both and compare
 
I have both the 2.5-20 (On a Cross) and the 4-32 (on a Proof MPA hunting rifle). The 4-32 is easier to get behind but by no means is the 2.5-20 difficult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rlsmith1
I have to say, I got behind the 2.5-20 for hours and really liked it. I was impressed. Didn't expect the eyebox to be as forgiving as it was. Certainly had to change parallax some but that was to be expected. If Leupold doesn't put the PR2 in the MK5 3.6-18. I think I might snag the 2.5-20 for the MK12. Mag range is certainly awesome for that gun.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bayoubigcat, Snapper314, Glassaholic and 1 other person
J-Fonz said:
I have both the 2.5-20 (On a Cross) and the 4-32 (on a Proof MPA hunting rifle). The 4-32 is easier to get behind but by no means is the 2.5-20 difficult.
Click to expand...
What are your thoughts regarding the 4-32 on a Cross?

I am in the process of exploring possible upgrades to mine, which currently has a Burris Eliminator IV. I use it for hunting in South Carolina and New England. My barrel is being upgraded to a 20" 308 from Straight Jacket Armory because I was not happy with groups out of the stock 16" when using heavier rounds.
 
Greg M said:
What are your thoughts regarding the 4-32 on a Cross?

I am in the process of exploring possible upgrades to mine, which currently has a Burris Eliminator IV. I use it for hunting in South Carolina and New England. My barrel is being upgraded to a 20" 308 from Straight Jacket Armory because I was not happy with groups out of the stock 16" when using heavier rounds.
Click to expand...
Don’t see why it wouldn’t work and work well.
 
I sent quite a few rounds downrange breaking in my 22creed. Has a nx8 2.5-20 milXt on it. This is a newer production from last summer. I quite like it to be honest. Yes parallax requires tuning once you change distance or magnification, but it's very simple, once image goes crisp/sharp, parallax is gone. My 4-32 is same way. Unlike some scopes there's a large range where image is sharp, but to be parallax free, you have to fine tune.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BurtG and rlsmith1
I have the 2.5-20 and 4-32. I also have an ATACR. I use them for different purposes and all are nice glass to shoot behind. The ATACR is heavy so I don't use that on any lightweight rifles. I use the NX8s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Comparable option to Nightforce NX8?
Replies
14
Views
772
Cutout
C
C
Early NX8 Issues?
Replies
35
Views
775
carbonbased
carbonbased
unclemoak
SOLD Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 Mil-CF2 C638
Replies
3
Views
454
unclemoak
unclemoak
W
Rifle Scopes Nightforce NX8 4-32x50 vs Leupold Mark 5HD 5-25x56 (Illuminated)
Replies
32
Views
1K
Smokin7s
Smokin7s
Cmelde01
Need help with scope selection
Replies
0
Views
57
Cmelde01
Cmelde01
Top Bottom
Back