NX8 4-32 or Mark 5HD 7-35?

[Army of One]

New long range rifle (benchrest), and in the market for another scope. Narrowed down to the scopes listed in the title, and wanted some opinions on choosing one over the other.

On two other rifles, I currently own a Mark 5HD 3.8-18 and a NX8 2.5-20, and absolutely love them both, and can't really make heads or tails of which I like better, or which might be better. I can say that the eye box on the Leupold is seemingly more generous, and the parallax adjustment is easier to contend with compared to the NX8, but that's the extent of it.

Again, looking for opinions from the experts that have experience with both.

Thanks in advance.

 

[CSTactical]

We can go over the pros and cons of each option with you at 916-670-1103

 

[rlsmith1]

Seems like the NF 2.5-20 gets the most criticism while the MK5 3-18 gets a lot of good reviews. If the differences are minimal to you then the power range is likely up to you. I love my MK5 5-25 and 3-18 but have thought hard about the NF 4-32. Parallax sensitivity on the NF has kept me happy with my MK5’s

 

[Army of One]

Thanks for the response.

I would not say that the difference is minimal as opposed to the fact that my experience and knowledge falls squarely into the "basic or enough to get by" category, which is why I am deferring to the experts for pros and cons. I do not know enough to make an informed and educated decision about either one.

 

[Jefe's Dope]

Mil-XT.

 

[Covertnoob5]

MK5 is definitely a better optic. The NX8 line are what we in the sports world call stat stuffers. They look great on paper, but in actuality they aren’t super great for the given price point. The NX8 as a whole will suffer from shallow DOF, tight eyebox, picky parallax, more prone to optical issues, and lack of elevation travel. There’s no free lunches in optics and so for that price point you can’t stuff all the features, in a 30mm package at that size and weight. The mk5 is a full blown scope that outside of illumination is a great crossover optic because of the weight and reticle options. I could not recommend the NX8 really to many people at all outside of a specific set of criteria. And even then I think there are better options.

 

[GUNNER10]

NX8 vs Mk5 I would go with a Mk5. I just think they are an easier scope to get behind. i think that if we are talking about the ATACR vs MK5, the ATACR is a better choice so which one I would go with depends on who's paying for it. If its your debit card, Everything gets an ATACR, if its mine, the mk5 is sufficent.

 

[KineticPerformance]

I use the Mark 5 3.6-18x at work, had one on a match rifle (small frame gasser) for a bit until match rules changed and I traded for a Gen3 1-10x. Of the Mark 5 options, I like it but it's the hardest of the three for me to really get set up well. I had the same issue with the Mark 6. I think they are pretty comparable to the NX8 2.5-20x with a each having some better and worse features than the other.

I have the NX8 4-32x on my hunting rifle but it also pulls match duty on a long range rimfire and occasionally at ruck matches. I guess I'm one of the weirdos that like the NX8 and find most of the shit people talk to be exaggerated and usually minimized by gun fit.

Mark 5 vs ATACR: I shoot 5-25x and 7-35x ATACR at work and shot the Mark 5 5-25x for a while on match guns. I was the only one of the team that took the 5-25x over the 7-35x (all Mark 5) to Ko2M because I did not like the 7-35x as much. It just seemed harder to focus, picked up more mirage, and generally didn't look as good to me. I am a huge ATACR fan and now shoot a 7-35x I'm nearly all comps. They are always heavier than a Leupold but have some distinct advantages of you need them.

Both are fine for most stuff but at this point I spend so much time on an ATACR or NX8 that I just prefer NF. I don't think the NX8 is a fair comparison to an ATACR or Mark 5 in the 7-35x range but I use my NX8 for shooting.22LR out to 400yds, the occasional ruck match where I don't want to lug the heavy gun with ATACR, etc and have no complaints.

 

[Conqueror]

I have the NX8 4-32x on my hunting rifle but it also pulls match duty on a long range rimfire and occasionally at ruck matches. I guess I'm one of the weirdos that like the NX8 and find most of the shit people talk to be exaggerated and usually minimized by gun fit.

Agreed. I have an NX8 4-32 and a Mk5 3.6-18 and I find relatively little difference between them. The NF is comfortable to use and I have not had any major parallax issues with it. I read all these people hating on it and feel like we must be talking about different products. To me they are both in a similar tier of optics above my Trijicon Credos but below my ZCO etc.

 

[White Mamba]

The 7-35 is surprisingly good.
Leupold stepped up their game with the 5hd series

 

[chevy_man]

I've used both. Had the option to buy them both at cost, and I have several Mark 5's but no nx8's.

The nx8 does 1 thing better and that's close range parallax for rimfire. It is more picky and I can get away with way more on the mk5 though.

 

[YotaEer]

MK 5 for sure.

I’ve only tried the 7-35x Mk5 and 4-32x NX8. NX8 isn’t a terrible scope but the parallax issues are a killer.