• 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

How do you think the SCR2 reticle does in cross over usage?

The subtensions show that the lines are very thin, but rather than dot there are crosses which sort of makes them appear bigger, am I right?

I'm thinking of buying a 3.3-18 to replace my 3-15 PST with the EBR 7c reticle, but I'm worried the SCR2 would be even thinner than the 7c which I struggle with being too thin.
I personally think the SCR2 reticle is too thin for crossover use, it is in fact one of the thinnest reticles I've seen and that's why for me personally I would choose to get illumination, I think a lot of competitors will like it, but for me I prefer a thicker reticle, heck I even thought the SCR reticle in my XTR II 4-20's was "too thin" but at least those scopes had illumination. In this regard, I think the Mil-C and Mil-XT reticles are much better and wish Burris would have followed suit with their SCR2 and made it a little thicker instead of a littler thinner than the SCR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beetroot
How do you think the SCR2 reticle does in cross over usage?

The subtensions show that the lines are very thin, but rather than dot there are crosses which sort of makes them appear bigger, am I right?

I'm thinking of buying a 3.3-18 to replace my 3-15 PST with the EBR 7c reticle, but I'm worried the SCR2 would be even thinner than the 7c which I struggle with being too thin.

I agree with Bill to an extent. I think the SCR2 is thin for low power usage in hunting. But I do disagree in certain aspects.

I think if you are low power and making 200 yard or closer shots, you just need a crosshair. And having played with it a bit on its lowest magnification, I think I could see it.

And I have to say as well, I'm not a big believer in the whole, thick timber or low light scenario that gets tossed around so often in this section. 40 years of big game hunting and it's just never played out. If its light enough to see what you're shooting at, I can see my reticle. Years of owning a scope with an illuminated reticle, and I never needed it. I'm just not sold on them.

I do think illumination would improve the visibility of the SCR2. If a guy had his heart set on it I would say go for it. I have said in past posts that illumination would be the way to go for the SCR2. But the more I play with it, the less I think that's neccessary.
I seem to be able to pick it up fairly well in low light.

Personally though, for a crossover, I think I would just run the SCR.
 
Last edited:
So to put my money where my mouth is I figured I better see for myself how visible the reticle was in low light, and stop speculating about it.

Here in Idaho, legal shooting light is 30 minutes before sunrise. At 22 minutes before sunrise this morning I was looking through my 3.3-18 at distances out to 200 yards. Long story short, I could sufficiently see my reticle to take a shot at that distance on an identifiable game animal. Anything further than that I would tack on a little more magnification. For me, the reticle becomes clear at 5x or 6x. As in usable subtensions.

In the big country I hunt, I spent years with my 4-12 Bushnell set on 7x, only dropping to 4x in timber, and cranking to 12x for longer shots or looking at game. But again, it's big country here.

I suppose the quality of your vision plays into your ability to see the reticle. I'm 53 and have no corrected vision. Not even to read. So eyesight is good. So it pretty much makes sense to me that I have never in my memory had an issue with seeing my reticle in the very narrow little low light window of early morning or evening. By the time it was 5 minutes till sunrise, I think any reticle on the market would be visible to anyone. (I tried to take pics, but my phone kept trying to shift the image everytime I got close.)

I think the SCR2 is a better target reticle than hunting reticle. Bill makes a good point that it is thin. It should be fine as a crossover, but not ideal. As I said above, i think the SCR would do double duty better. The grid reticle isnt necessary for competition, just handy every once in a while. And I have several XTR2s with the SCR on hunting rifles and really like it.

Just my 2bits.
 
I agree with Bill to an extent. I think the SCR2 is thin for low power usage in hunting. But I do disagree in certain aspects.

I think if you are low power and making 200 yard or closer shots, you just need a crosshair. And having played with it a bit on its lowest magnification, I think I could see it.

And I have to say as well, I'm not a big believer in the whole, thick timber or low light scenario that gets tossed around so often in this section. 40 years of big game hunting and it's just never played out. If its light enough to see what you're shooting at, I can see my reticle. Years of owning a scope with an illuminated reticle, and I never needed it. I'm just not sold on them.

I do think illumination would improve the visibility of the SCR2. If a guy had his heart set on it I would say go for it. I have said in past posts that illumination would be the way to go for the SCR2. But the more I play with it, the less I think that's neccessary.
I seem to be able to pick it up fairly well in low light.

Personally though, for a crossover, I think I would just run the SCR.
I would rely on your experience on hunting much more than mine birddog, I was a SFP hunter until a few years after my first kid was born and then I took a break until a few years ago (and while I've put in many hours and days into the sport, the elk always seem to elude me), and getting back into it I've committed myself to using FFP scopes in this (and all) environments because I believe it to be a superior tool even with its low magnification drawbacks. My desire for illumination may have a mental impact more than a reality, but it also might be because of my eyes, last year I was diagnosed with presbyopia and while I still have 20/15 vision, I do have a prescription to read and for night so those situations may be messing with my brains interpretation of what I see. When I owned acreage I did a lot of low light testing and there were many reticles that would "get lost" when scanning through the thick stuff, but a flick of the illumination and it made picking up the reticle that much easier. The times where I've needed illumination in the field are few and far between, but to need it and not have it always lingers in the back of my head.
 
Using the impact 29 moa in low light and moar f1, leads me to only own ffp with illumination. When the xtriii is available with illumination I will definitely look at it.
 
I would rely on your experience on hunting much more than mine birddog, I was a SFP hunter until a few years after my first kid was born and then I took a break until a few years ago (and while I've put in many hours and days into the sport, the elk always seem to elude me), and getting back into it I've committed myself to using FFP scopes in this (and all) environments because I believe it to be a superior tool even with its low magnification drawbacks. My desire for illumination may have a mental impact more than a reality, but it also might be because of my eyes, last year I was diagnosed with presbyopia and while I still have 20/15 vision, I do have a prescription to read and for night so those situations may be messing with my brains interpretation of what I see. When I owned acreage I did a lot of low light testing and there were many reticles that would "get lost" when scanning through the thick stuff, but a flick of the illumination and it made picking up the reticle that much easier. The times where I've needed illumination in the field are few and far between, but to need it and not have it always lingers in the back of my head.

I definitely agree with you that illumination is the ticket for ease of use. I think it's a needs versus wants kinda issue at the end of the day. I dont need it, never have. But I totally understand if people want it. It's another tool in the bag.

I was going to compare the illuminated SCR against the SCR2 this morning. I dug out my 300 Norma with a 25x XTR2 on it, and discovered it didnt even have a battery in it. The batteries were dead on my 6.5 Grendel and 6.5 Creedmoor. And there were no batteries in my 1-8's on my 3 Gun rifles. I dont use illumination for anything, I dont own a functioning scope battery. So maybe I'm not the best guy to represent the whole illumination discussion. ;)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Glassaholic
I have enjoyed the read. In thinking of other options, I haven't seen the bushnell DMR2pro 3.2-21x50 mentioned, is that due to it being almost 20% heavier?
 
I have enjoyed the read. In thinking of other options, I haven't seen the bushnell DMR2pro 3.2-21x50 mentioned, is that due to it being almost 20% heavier?
Bushnell’s elite tactical line are solid scopes. A couple things about the DMR II Pro, yes they are heavier and they do not offer illumination as well as narrow FOV. but with some of the crazy deals you can get them for these days they offer a lot for the money if you like the reticles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beretta_man11
Not to get too in-depth (or at all), but my 4-32 will be residing on my grendel or ar10 soon enough. Unfortunately, it just isn’t what I had hoped it to be for a bolt gun. I feel it performs best in the 6-20x range. I know many will disagree, but I am not a fan of temperamental equipment or issues with tight eye boxes, as some like to call them. I only have one good eye which makes me a bit more critical of idiosyncrasies.
I really do applaud NF for an 8x optic, but a 6x would have been great and far more worth it if it the shortcomings could have been overcome.
Seems like an 8x system in a compact package isn’t yet ready for prime time.
Now about that 10x, I’m looking at you Vortex. ?
 
Seems like an 8x system in a compact package isn’t yet ready for prime time.
Now about that 10x, I’m looking at you Vortex. ?

Agreed... my hope is that nightforce released the NX8s because they were easier to make a finished product for and gave them the opportunity to gather customer feedback while working on a similar 8x lineup for the ATACR at a higher price point obviously... even if the new ones gained a few inches/pounds it would be a VERY good offer.


My heart was broken this year at SHOT
... maybe next year LOL.

The vortex could very easily be my go to hunting/AR optic if it is done right. Again here is to hoping. So at least we got one more candidate for what I am looking for lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: HolyCity73
Agreed... my hope is that nightforce released the NX8s because they were easier to make a finished product for and gave them the opportunity to gather customer feedback while working on a similar 8x lineup for the ATACR at a higher price point obviously... even if the new ones gained a few inches/pounds it would be a VERY good offer.


My heart was broken this year at SHOT
... maybe next year LOL.

The vortex could very easily be my go to hunting/AR optic if it is done right. Again here is to hoping. So at least we got one more candidate for what I am looking for lol
I am not a fan boy, but I know what I like. That being said, I have a few NF, several Leupold and Minox for hunting only, 1 SBPM2 and a stable of Gen 2 Razors. At the price point we are discussing, it truly is just personal preference. I like what works best for me. The G2 razors just happen to be it. Can’t wait to see what 2020 brings from Vortex.
That’s all.
 
Anyone heard when the Mil-XT ones will be shipping?

A friend has had an NX8 2.5-20 MIL-XT on pre-order for awhile now... just shipped this past week. So they are trickling out slowly starting now.
 
Has anyone weighed the new NX8s? Are the specs listed on the product page accurate? or did they weigh them without caps?
 
Has anyone weighed the new NX8s? Are the specs listed on the product page accurate? or did they weigh them without caps?
The weight is without caps, when I got the NX8 2.5-20 I put it on the scale and it came in very close, close enough it wasn't worth writing about. Unlike Bushnell ET 3.5-21 which has always come in heavier than their specs list.
 
The weight is without caps, when I got the NX8 2.5-20 I put it on the scale and it came in very close, close enough it wasn't worth writing about. Unlike Bushnell ET 3.5-21 which has always come in heavier than their specs list.

Thanks for the reply. Just ordered one in place of a march 3-24x52 for a sherman hunting rifle
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
I have the NX8. I needed a quality scope for my Vudoo V22. I chose it because I wanted a .2 mil reticle, paralax free shoting at 25yards, under 2 grand, and I needed it in a small package. This scope fit the bill. Depth of field is a bit fussy but once you label your paralax adjustment everything comes together. I was really impressed with the scope. I found eye box more forgiving than the SB short so I was pumped and delighted with this scope.
20200213_213331.jpg20200213_212904.jpg
 
I found eye box more forgiving than the SB short so I was pumped and delighted with this scope.
Makes me wonder if there are some QC issues, as this definitely wasn't the case for me, the NX8 had the worst eyebox I've experienced in a scope since the Sig Tango 4 4-16. Pondering picking up another NX8 at some point to see if it's any different.
 
Backstory

When the Nightforce NX8 long range scopes were announced I raised an eyebrow. Over the years I’ve had or used many different long-range scopes from the budget category all the way into alpha class, but in all that time I have never owned a Nightforce and the reason is because they never made a scope that appealed to me. The ATACR F1 series was the first that really drew my attention, but the 5-25 is a hefty beast and has poor FOV performance at the low end. The 4-16x42 drew my attention but I rarely opt for scopes with objectives smaller than 50mm because most of my scopes get used in low light situations. I realize they recently came out with the F1 4-16x50 but this only happened after other manufacturers were already offering 3x/4x – 18x/20x and I prefer having more than 16x at the top end, if Nightforce had an ATACR F1 4-20x50 I’d be all over that. I think it's safe to say that nobody was expecting Nightforce to come out with this NX8 long range line and offer a 2.5-20 and 4-32 scope and certainly nobody was expecting these scopes to come in at the $2k price point. The Nightforce NX8 is using an 8x erector design in a short body similar to the March F series scopes. I’ve owned two of the March scopes in the past and their lackluster FML-1 reticle and finicky depth and parallax have always had me wanting more even though they impressed optically. So, the question that has been on my mind has been – where did NF compromise in order to build an 8x erector scope in a short body and sell it for $2k. I am already familiar with the compromises that March had to make with their design, but the March scopes also cost more than $3k if you want illumination. For the most part, online reviews of the NX8 have been nothing short of praising this scope for all it offers with no glaring compromises and I realized that in order to find out for myself I would have to purchase the scope and put it through some initial testing.

Build Quality and Ergo

The NX8 appears to have excellent build quality – without putting the scope through the wringer like underwater, freezing, etc. just the overall look and feel of the scope is well done. All finishes are nice and well executed. Some may balk at the 30mm tube but NF engineers were able to squeeze 32 mil of elevation which is more than some 34mm designs. However, it’s not all roses as the design of the NX8 pushes the turret housing forward which means there is very little room for a ring or mount between the turret housing and the front objective bell, this may make it more difficult on some rifle platforms to mount in the correct location. Nightforce also opted not to use a fast focus diopter which means there is lots of turning of the diopter to get it right (more on this later), but they did make the diopter locking which is a nice feature and I’ve also read the ATACR series suffers from a moving ocular when you adjust magnification which would definitely annoy me since I like to use caps. Speaking of caps, another nice feature in a $2k scope is the NX8 comes with NF branded Tenebraex caps, a very nice accessory to be included.

View attachment 7136417

Turrets

Being my first Nightforce scope I did not know what to expect but based on rave reviews from other owners online I had the expectation that NF scopes excel optically and mechanically. My first experience with the turrets was a bit underwhelming to be honest. Compared to Minox ZP5, Kahles, Schmidt, Leupold Mark 5 and others, the NX8 turrets don’t have the snap I was expecting. Where other turrets have a distinct click or clunk between each .1 mil mark, the NX8 has a more muted sound and oddly enough, the windage turret has that more distinct click that I wish the elevation turret had. With most other scopes it’s the other way around, usually the elevation turret feels the best and the windage is lacking. But, “man does not live on clicks alone”, and while muted the NX8 turrets are precise with very little play and easy to dial elevation, in the end I do not think I would have a problem accurately dialing and the spacing of the 10 mil per rev turret is nicer compared to the tight spacing of the 15 mil per turn and greater variety found in other scopes. The windage is capped which is a very nice feature for those who don’t tend to dial wind and don’t want that turret getting bumped while moving around in the field.

View attachment 7136423

View attachment 7136418

Reticle and Illumination

For the longest time Nightforce was stuck in the SFP market but had great BDC style reticles, it took them a while to get into FFP and then it took even longer for them to get a decent .2 mil hash reticle with the Mil-C and then finally last year with the Mil-XT Christmas tree version. The scope I purchased has the Mil-C reticle and I have to say, I like it better than the SKMR with regard to thickness, the SKMR is pretty thin and sometimes difficult to pick out in shadows or high contrast backgrounds, but the Mil-C seems to be a tad thicker and easier to discern in those conditions. What I don’t like with the Mil-C is the size of the .2 hash marks, they are quite tall and even though they alternate (.2 and .8 on bottom while .4 and .6 are on top) I still find them a bit distracting (again, personal preference). I knew the NX8 had Digillum illumination, but not owning a NF previously I spent quite some time trying to figure out how on earth do you turn on and set illumination until by accident I pressed the middle of the parallax/side focus and realized there is a button that depresses – that is a slick feature; however, unlike a dial control, it is somewhat of a pain to switch between different brightness levels as you have to click in each time to adjust and it only goes to the next brightest setting until you get to max or minimum and it flashes several times and then it starts to get brighter (or dimmer) in which each successive click, but hold the button for about 5 seconds and it switches from red to green illumination. I’m not sure which I like better, the red still seems brighter and more pronounced but I’d want a lot more time with it in different light levels to make a determination, what I do like is the fact that you have the option. I did compare daylight bright to my Kahles K318i which has the brightest illumination I’ve seen to date, and the NF kept right up with it, very usable daylight illumination.

Image Quality (IQ)

I’m going to break down IQ into four categories – Contrast, Resolution, Color and CA

Contrast
The NX8 shows really good contrast when your eye is in center. The NX8 appears to be on par with the K318i within its sweet spot.​

Resolution
Without spending extended time with my resolution charts it would be difficult to discern just how well the NF Nx8 2.5-20x50 performs compared to the alpha class optics; however, initial impressions are very high and in some situations seems to be on par if not slightly better than the K318i. However, while the resolution was impressive the NX8 shows pretty significant image distortion if your eye is not perfectly centered. This is compounded at close ranges under 100 yards and seems to be more forgiving the further out you go; in this regard, the K318i definitely excels as very little distortion is noticeable and edge to edge sharpness is maintained throughout the majority of the zoom range.​
Color
Color fidelity seems to be managed very well, colors looked true to life. There was not an overly warm or overly cool cast to the image. I prefer an image that is neutral to warm and the NX8 seems to deliver for what my eyes like to see. Compared to the Kahles the color seemed very comparable.​
CA
This is one area where I thought the NX8 was really going to struggle, but it was very difficult for me to induce any strong CA even in my test target with white on black, the NX8 handled CA exceedingly well. Compared to the Kahles, CA controlled appeared to be on par if not slightly better in some situations which is very impressive indeed as the K318i controls CA very well and only bested by the ZCO ZC420 in the ultra short category.​
DISCLAIMER: DO NOT USE THE BELOW IMAGE TO JUDGE IQ, THE NX8 PERFORMED MUCH BETTER THAN THROUGH THE SCOPE IMAGES CAN CAPTURE.​


Glass

Outside of the above issues with the edges, the glass is superb, Nightforce offers very little information on the optical design or glass used in the NX8; however, this article from Guns & Ammo - https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/nx8-nightforce-scopes-review/364247 indicates that NF is using ED glass in the NX8 and uses additional glass elements in the 2.5-20 design to help correct for aberrations in the ultra short design.

Eyebox

As expected, the eyebox on the NX8 is very finicky, you have to have your eye placed just right for a clear sight picture, the Kahles K318i, ZCO ZC420 and Schmidt Ultra Short 3-20 are much more forgiving in this regard (but they are all quite a bit more expensive). Proper scope mounting techniques and proper cheekweld is going to eliminate much of this effect, but it is still there and may pose an issue for some especially if they find themselves shooting from odd positions where it’s difficult to get your eye perfectly centered.

Depth/DOF

The March scopes I had struggled with Depth Of Field (DOF) and this was one area where I thought the NX8 might struggle as well, and I was right. You do not get the same level of depth forgiveness with the NX8 as you do with other scopes at this price point and higher. The NX8 is not horrible, but you will find yourself having to tweak the side focus a bit more in order get objects near and far in proper focus. Compared to the Kahles, I was having to make more adjustments to focus whereas the K318i/ZCO/Schmidt was much more forgiving with almost a “near, middle and far” behavior.

Parallax

Similar to DOF, parallax seems to follow the same protocol. The NX8 was much more finicky with parallax and has to be set just right with minute adjustments to get the reticle to be parallax free with the image. The NX8 can focus from 11 yds to infinity and therefore has a very long focus adjustment range which further compounds getting the parallax just right. Initially I thought I could not get a parallax free image at magnifications below 16x as I saw the reticle moving all over the place with slight eye displacement; however, after fiddling with the diopter a bit more and fine tuning of the side focus/parallax I was able to tame it down some, but still noticed movement until I realized the whole image was moving, so the scope was parallax free but because of the distortion and finicky eyebox, anything but dead center eye placement caused the image to warp around like a fun house curved mirror at a carnival. All scopes show some of this distortion especially at lower magnifications; however, the NX8 shows a significant amount of this and is probably the most unforgiving aspect of this scope. In contrast, the Kahles image seemed rock solid along with the reticle with little to no discernable distortion until you get into very low magnification ranges.

View attachment 7136451

Conclusion

Putting an 8x erector into a short body has its limitations and NF engineers were not able to overcome those limitations (at least for the price point they are selling at). The narrow depth of field and heavy edge distortion of the image especially at lower magnifications along with the finicky parallax has me still wanting for more from the NX8. While I like the Mil-C reticle mag range and illumination, there are just too many other drawbacks for me with the NX8 personally. It’s too bad because I really wanted this scope to exceed my expectations and while it has in some areas, it has not in others. I am sure there will be plenty of shooters who are not bothered by these shortcomings and will be quite pleased with this scope.

Other $2k class scopes I have used would be the Leupold Mark 5HD 3.6-18x44 which had much better turrets and DOF/Parallax; however, my copy did not do that great in overall IQ and the sweet spot of the NF NX8 was quite a bit better than the Leupold. I've had the Steiner T5Xi's and their CA was so bad they were immediately returned. The Bushnell LRTS 4.5-18x44 and Tract Toric 4-20x50 are lower priced but suffer from heavy CA; however, the do have impressive IQ for the price. At a little higher price point the Vortex AMG 6-24x50 is a better all around scope (overall IQ, turrets). But none of these scopes offer an 8x erector inside a short body, so in reality Nightforce has no competition from any scope at this price point.

I realize there are many who will not “see” the same issues that I see and will claim their version has no edge distortion or is not finicky with DOF or parallax, etc., I am simply pointing out issues that I see based on my experience with lesser and better optics. There are compromises with most every optic and we all have personal preferences when it comes to some of these features. I think for many, the Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 will be a favorite, it certainly fills a niche we have not seen before at this price, kudos to NF for being bold enough to bring something like this to market.

EDIT: I wanted to give the Nightforce NX8 a "second chance" and decided to spend a lot more time with it. While the edge distortion is there, it is not nearly as prominent when you get a proper cheekweld, the eyebox is still very tight but as long as you can be in good alignment, you may not notice much distortion when transitioning to different targets. I think dynamic shooters (like PRS and NRL style) and those who find themselves in awkward shooting positions will still struggle with this scope, those who do not find themselves in these situations often may not have as much an issue. The finicky parallax is still there but again, it is tamed with proper scope mounting and consistent cheekweld.

View attachment 7136416
Fantastic write up!
 
"it is tamed with proper scope mounting and consistent cheekweld."

This I can confirm. I have 1,000 rounds downrange with the scope on my rifle. If I was running around with it in some kind of dynamic situation, I'm sure I would appreciate a scope with a more forgiving eye relief and eye box, but....the shooting I do is rather stationary and so far, I'm very quickly and easily able to move across about a 75 yards field of steel at various distances, out to 400, with no problem whatsoever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CSTactical
@wjm308

I have read your reveiw of this and bushnell dmr2. I am currios if you think the nightforce is worth the extra money over the dmr2 illuminated. I am currios of what you think because you you seem to value many of the same features i do.

If the xtr3 illuminated was available i think that would be the middle ground i am after but as of now i am really torn between these 2.

Bushnell.
Nearly half the cost
Proven turrets and tracking
Usable but maybe not same level IQ
Usable but not a great reticle

Nightforce
Better reticle
Lighter
Nightforce quality
I am concerned about the eye box and DOF

Thanks
 
@wjm308

I have read your reveiw of this and bushnell dmr2. I am currios if you think the nightforce is worth the extra money over the dmr2 illuminated. I am currios of what you think because you you seem to value many of the same features i do.

If the xtr3 illuminated was available i think that would be the middle ground i am after but as of now i am really torn between these 2.

Bushnell.
Nearly half the cost
Proven turrets and tracking
Usable but maybe not same level IQ
Usable but not a great reticle

Nightforce
Better reticle
Lighter
Nightforce quality
I am concerned about the eye box and DOF

Thanks
Your very last sentence above are some of the biggest detriments to the NX8 2.5-20 IMHO, so if those are the things you're concerned about I think you would like the Bushnell a bit better. While the Bushnell has a narrow FOV, the edge distortion with the NX8 obscures the edge clarity on the NX8. The Bushnell ET DMR II is a great scope for the price. NF NX8 has a better reticle, better illumination, better center resolution, better CA and is lighter than the Bushnell - it is also going to have better resale value unless you can find a killer deal on the DMR II. A lot of owners do not seem bothered by the shortcomings of the NX8 2.5-20 design, not sure if it's justification of the NF brand or they simply don't shoot in situations that would put those shortcomings to the test. You might be one of those shooters so the NF might be worth a try for you. Not sure how much I've helped, I could go either way between these two scopes, but if you're looking to save some money I do not think the DMR II will let you down. One final thought, the DMR II can only focus to 75y while the NX8 is 11y, so if you think you'll be shooting close range there is a clear winner in the NX8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Birddog6424
Your very last sentence above are some of the biggest detriments to the NX8 2.5-20 IMHO, so if those are the things you're concerned about I think you would like the Bushnell a bit better. While the Bushnell has a narrow FOV, the edge distortion with the NX8 obscures the edge clarity on the NX8. The Bushnell ET DMR II is a great scope for the price. NF NX8 has a better reticle, better illumination, better center resolution, better CA and is lighter than the Bushnell - it is also going to have better resale value unless you can find a killer deal on the DMR II. A lot of owners do not seem bothered by the shortcomings of the NX8 2.5-20 design, not sure if it's justification of the NF brand or they simply don't shoot in situations that would put those shortcomings to the test. You might be one of those shooters so the NF might be worth a try for you. Not sure how much I've helped, I could go either way between these two scopes, but if you're looking to save some money I do not think the DMR II will let you down. One final thought, the DMR II can only focus to 75y while the NX8 is 11y, so if you think you'll be shooting close range there is a clear winner in the NX8.


Thanks.

I have been thinking dmr 2for a while but kind of thinking buy once cry once. I just dont want to be disappointed in a 2k optic. In all honesty i dont know if i could see a difference. My current optic is a gen 1 pst so anything is a huge improvement.
 
Thanks.

I have been thinking dmr 2for a while but kind of thinking buy once cry once. I just dont want to be disappointed in a 2k optic. In all honesty i dont know if i could see a difference. My current optic is a gen 1 pst so anything is a huge improvement.
My personal opinion, the Nightforce ATACR series is more along the lines of "buy once, cry once" rather than the NX8. The ATACR series is better overall, better glass, better turrets and possibly better build quality. With optics, by and large, you get what you pay for so when you see a 4x erector ATACR 4-16 selling for around the same price as an 8x erector NX8 you have to ask, what compromises did they make with the design to meet that price point. Don't get me wrong, even with the compromises they made I think the NX8 is pretty impressive for the price point and everything it offers. But I have come to appreciate scope designs that are more forgiving than what the NX8 offers, again, my personal preference, YMMV.
 
I have a the NX8 2 -20.
The relative short depth of field is it's only setback IMO. And, to be honest, I believe it keeps you shooting parallax free because you notice your target will be blurry if not set correctly. Lots of scopes have plenty of depth of field and they look great at all distances all the time...but that doesn't make it parallax free and opens you up for error.

This scope is perfect for NRL 22 style matches...might not want o go hunt w it, but I can shoot peanuts at 100 yards and measure my splashes and POI with a .1mil in my reticle.

I'm shooting the best I can possibly shoot w my scope. Find me another .2 mil reticle for $1,700 that are parallax free at 25 yards in this size package...with tracking history of a NF and I'm all ears.

For my application, this was the best compact scope under 2G for my vudoo V-22.
 
Did you go with one of these and why or why not? Thanks, I'm in the same boat as you were.

I haven’t yet. It got pushed to the back burner for the time being unfortunately. I would likely go with the 2.5-20 or the 4-32 though. The 35mm tube is about a deal breaker for me
 
Thanks, I like the Leupold brand more, but I like the Nightforce MOAR reticle more. My barrel and stock are four months out, so I have time. I hope you can get yours soon!
 
I had this scope on my final list but in the end didn’t think it was the right optic. I was looking for a good FFP, scope with illumination and zero stop that can focus down to 10yds. My application is a PCP air rifle, most hunting situations are 5-25yds and for target I can stretch it out as far as I please. In the end I went with the Element Optics Nexus. It’s a new company and the Nexus is a 5-20x50 scope in the $1500 price range. Scope is very nice for the money and I think it’s in striking range of the Kahles scopes for optical quality (I never had CA issues with my 312 or 624) and mechanics (turrets). I posted my initial impressions of the scope in the scope forum.
 
Figured I would bump this up and see if anyone has been able to use the F2 (second focal plane model) and how they like it. Anyone?
 
  • Like
Reactions: godofthunder
Bumping again to see if there are any of the F2 models out in the wild yet? Really on the fence about ordering one, but lack of reviews so far have me hesitant.
 
Bumping again to see if there are any of the F2 models out in the wild yet? Really on the fence about ordering one, but lack of reviews so far have me hesitant.

F2 users don't strike me as the kind that want to hang out on the Hide. A review is bound to crop up eventually.
 
Just stole a NF customer away at the NRL match in Northern Utah over the weekend. One of the shooters in my squad was using a loaner 32x NX8 and was thinking he would buy one.

After a side by side against my 30x XTR3 he changed his mind. He ordered the Burris yesterday. I think the RO at that stage is also on the hook for one. He has an AMG but wanted another optic more competition oriented. He was pretty impressed. Especially when he heard the price.

The XTR3 sells itself once people get a chance to look at it and compare. Im into double digits in the number of folks I've converted from the MK5 and NX8. All by simply dropping mine alongside of them to compare.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Earnhardt
The NX8 4-32x50 F1 T3 is what I have and love it. It is like the mini ATACR for me. It is definitely better than the SHV. Yes sure people say it is less than an ATACR. My eyes can discern any difference. AT 32X the eye box is the same as the ATACR 7-35 at 35X. The parallax is a little bit more sensitive. I can however get focused without parallax quick as well. It is lighter, more compact. Is clarity less than the ATACR? For some maybe. For what the ATACR has does not warrant the price difference if there is difference in clarity. I love it. Glad NF made it. If I can hit the same target with an ATACR vs NX8, then I will take the NX8. I really don't need the added little bit of improvement I may (if any) get from the ATACR.
 
I'm shooting the best I can possibly shoot w my scope. Find me another .2 mil reticle for $1,700 that are parallax free at 25 yards in this size package...with tracking history of a NF and I'm all ears.


 
Last edited:
@Birddog6424...........WE GET IT!!!! U like Burris. Aren't you also sponsored by them? So I for one am gonna take what you say with a Grain of Salt. It doesn't mean your opinion has no value, but its also shaded by the cloud of some type of incentive to push Burris.

I have no doubt the XTR3 is a nice scope but every time somebody post about a specific optic, especially Nightforce, you jump on the thread pimping the XTR3. Optics designers at Burris chose to stay with a Tighter magnification range. Nightforce went the other direction and went with an 8x zoom range in compact package for <2K, FFP, and sub 30 OZ. That design is probably going to have some optical limitations at the extremes on the low and high end, and some teething pains. I don't think the NX8 is the best scope out there for guys shooting PRS, at least thats not where it excels....But there is a hell of a lot of other applications for scopes outside of that specific shooting discipline that it works pretty well for.

Personally, I like Burris optics, I've had several that were great optics. Also have had several TURDS in their lower mid tier stuff. I used to really like the Full fields for inexpensive "hunting" glass....... Any of them made in the last few years not so much. Really miss the old Black Diamonds. I thought they were a great american made Leupold alternative back in the day. Also had an XTR 2 for about 5 minutes. Glass was like looking thru a milk jug. It felt well made but I couldn't get by the crappy glass.
 
I know people get it. Everywhere but the Hide ;)

Tomorrow a post could drop, " Hey fellas, I'm looking for a 2k optic with a grid reticle for PRS", and twenty guys will post up to get the MK5, tell the OP to jump on the great price of the Gen II Razor, or snag up that NX8 because it says NF on the side.

In spite of years of bullet proof tracking and amazing durability in the XTR Series. In spite of all the great reviews on the XTR3. And in spite of the simple fact that head to head against the other brands, the Burris XTR3 is a kick ass scope, it still gets overlooked here on the Hide.

I'm aware that I post ad nauseum about Burris. Believe me, I know it. And I appreciate you guys dont bust my chops over it. I'm on the Burris shooting team and I dont hide it. So salt my opinion liberally, I'm cool with that. But maybe drop that XTR3 suggestion to that OP next time..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chasing3
I liked the xtriii that i bought as a crossover but that scr2 reticle was too thin.aside from that, if they ever figure out how to illuminate the scr2 reticle and make it just a tad thicker, ill be selling my atacrs to swap over to xtriii and pocketing the $1000 difference

When the illuminated model hits it will come with a thicker reticle. I heard that directly from the product development guy.

Thats going to make a hell of a nice crossover scope...
 
got one to put on my 224v minifix ... also got the 4-32 for my 6.5 Fix.
 
...the Burris XTR3 is a kick ass scope, it still gets overlooked here on the Hide.
I really like the Burris XTR III 5.5-30x56 but the SCR 2 Mil is not illuminated. I reached out inquiring if/when an illuminated version would be available. They said some time in 2021. Unfortunately, I couldn't wait and purchased an NX8. Had the Burris been illuminated it would have been a really tough choice.
 
If they'd just get it out already, but waiting, and waiting, and waiting... ;)

They definitely have a vision in their head of what they want this scope to be, and they're willing to invest the time it takes to get it right. They aren't rushing this to market.

The fact that the competition version is doing so well for them has made that decision a little easier I suspect. I've been in line for a new 30x for almost 3 months now. Everything is allocated.

I'm hoping we see the illuminated version at SHOT.
 
I’ll be jumping on the illumination version but honestly I hope they don’t make the inner portion of the reticle too thick. If they do then I may just go back to this non-illumination model.
 
They definitely have a vision in their head of what they want this scope to be, and they're willing to invest the time it takes to get it right. They aren't rushing this to market.

The fact that the competition version is doing so well for them has made that decision a little easier I suspect. I've been in line for a new 30x for almost 3 months now. Everything is allocated.

I'm hoping we see the illuminated version at SHOT.
I would like to see it introduced at shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Birddog6424
I’ll be jumping on the illumination version but honestly I hope they don’t make the inner portion of the reticle too thick. If they do then I may just go back to this non-illumination model.

I doubt "too thick" is in the works. I believe it will be the thickness of the SCR in the XTRII. That reticle illuminates well. I never heard anyone call it either too thick or too thin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chasing3