Rifle Scopes Help Nightforce NX8 vs Leupold Mark 5HD

[Prebanpaul]

So I am looking for a scope to match up to a Sako 995 in 338 Lapua that I am purchasing tomorrow morning.

I have narrowed it down to two scopes.

The Nightforce advantages are their reticle (for me any ways) Mil-C and 50mm objective
cons 30mm tube an weight. 28 0z vs 18 Oz

Leupold mark 5 hd 3x18. Pros, 35mm tube, weight 36% lighter. I could use the CCH reticle but its really busy. Cons for me reticle and 44mm objective.


Parameters for use, is to have one hunting rifle for the rest of my life praticing out to 1k, and I will take a poke every now and then to a mile. I will be hunting whitetail, elk, pronghorn, black bear, hogs. I wanted to be able to shoot up to 1k . The gun is not the question. THis is the gun that I want.

My current rifles include Sako trg42 in 338 lapua, Sako 995 in 375, tikka tac a1 in 260, I am very proficient at shooting to 1k and even do a lot of shooting out to 1 mile.

 

[11bar]

Mark 5 all the way the glass is better to my eye.

 

[Birddog6424]

If you are looking at those two, you would also be well served by dropping the Burris 3.3-18 XTR3 into the comparison.

And I'm not sure, but it seems like you are listing the MK5 at 18ozs? Maybe I'm not understanding you. There isnt a 36% difference, they are all pretty close.

Edit, missed it, the above poster covered it.

 

[longshot2000]

I love the NX8 2.5-20x. The longer range is a push, and we do not see much demand. You did not mention which, so I assume the 2.5-20x. That is one of more popular scopes on the market today, and is solid. The Leupold Mark 5 HD in 3-18x is likewise a great scope, and the 2-25x does well with no complaints. The NF, I think, has a slight price advantage, and depending upon which mounts you have, you might be able to reuse a 30mm mount. I am not convinced that a 3-18x really benefits from 35mm tube.

At the end of the day, the NX8 is configured as a "last gen" scope (NXS) now magnified to 8x, but unbreakable, like the NXS. The Mark 5 is usually thought of as a 1/2 generation better glass, but not quite as good as an ATACR. We do mostly tactical scopes, and the NX8 is being used by Police SWAT snipers, but not military, while some Mark 5s are making their way into normal military roles.

Sorry, not being very helpful. My problem is I am an equal opportunity scope lover. I think of the NX8 as slightly more of a budget play in the 8x space, while the Mark 5 is a solid contender in the 5x market. Mostly a runner-up to ATACR and S&B and Steiner, but pretty close.

 

[Birddog6424]

I'd leave this scope out. Mine failed, replacement unit sent was one that's was kicked out by qc for a blem(even had a tag stating bad anodizing) and the elevation turret is crap compared to the original one I had. So that two swings and misses by Burris on the xtr3. The reticle is extremely thin, and honestly isn't really that usable in the lower 2/3 of mag range. The goods: decent glass, size, weight, parallax, fov. If those are the top concerns check it out, but I'd personally move right over it.

Sorry to hear that about yours. It's always frustrating to have optic issues. But it's not the whole line up. There's been a lot of good ones hit the market as well.

It's a can of worms to start talking about failed scopes. Everyone has them. I've seen several of the ones listed in this discussion in addition to yours. In fact, a very similar problem to yours, but in reverse.

I do agree in a hunting optic that the SCR is the better reticle than the SCR2. It doesnt suffer from lack of visibility at lower magnification.

 

[Prebanpaul]

SO to answer some questions. I went with the Leupold Mark 5. It really came down to dollars. Euro Optic had a demo one for $1499, $500 less than I could find it any where else. Then Leupold is offering a free Kestrel with purchase. Since I already have a kestrel, I should be able to sell it for $400 when it arrives. I found the weight of the scope on several different sights and finally realized that I was not saving any weight. The scope is suppose to be here today. I like the fact that it is very short, and if I ever need to it will be a great scope to use as a clip on thermal I could..

I will address some other things on here as well.

One when someone says that they have a problem seeing a sight at 3-5 magnification with thin reticles, i usually remind them that 99 percent of the scope will not be used at that power and to simply turn on the illumination and the problem is solved.

Next Burris.

Here is my thoughts on Burris, it is in my opinion the best scope on the market below 1k. I have owned or currently own, schmidt, nightforce,khales, Minox, Razor Hd2 and while the Burris is not any of those, under 1k the XTR2 is a tremendous value. I have looked through the 3's and I cannot find a big enough difference between them and the 2's to justify the huge increase in price. Burris did nothing spectacular in the is aspect. The reticle is a copied down version that is 6-8 years old. No great magnification break throughs, and the glass is still not up there with the top or elite glass. I will buy an xtr2 all day long and place it on AR's and my RimmFires. Hell I even have one on my encore in 45-70. That being said, I see no reason to ever purchase a 3 with the price difference shown.


My decision came down to the price, buy the time it is all said and done, I should be about $1100 dollars in the mark 5 new which means if I dont like it I can simply recoupe my money and move forward.

 

[redneckbmxer24]

You might want to confirm with Leupold whether a “demo” will qualify for the rebate. I couldn’t imagine that it would since demo is generally considered to be used condition.

 

[beetroot]

I'd leave this scope out. Mine failed, replacement unit sent was one that's was kicked out by qc for a blem(even had a tag stating bad anodizing) and the elevation turret is crap compared to the original one I had. So that two swings and misses by Burris on the xtr3. The reticle is extremely thin, and honestly isn't really that usable in the lower 2/3 of mag range. The goods: decent glass, size, weight, parallax, fov. If those are the top concerns check it out, but I'd personally move right over it.

Was it the 3.3-18 model you had?
I'm quite keen on that scope but am worried about the reticle being to thin.
Are you able to offer a comparison against other reticles? like the EBR 2/7c?

 

[Prebanpaul]

@redneckbmxer24 When it comes from the eroupe optic it does not say demo. And it comes with warranty card intact. So yes I got a smoking deal.

 

[Birddog6424]

You are officially the only guy on the planet who cant see the difference in glass between the Burris XTR2 and the XTR3.

But you're entitled to your opinion. The important thing is you're happy with what you bought. And the MK5 is a good scope.

 

[cleric]

I am in a similar debate. I have a mk 5 3-18 t3. I can put that on my 300wm hunting. But was looking at the new vortex scope. It I want ffp so will prolly move the mk5 to the 300 wm and get a new scope for the 6.5 creed fix. Since it’s just range and you may go with like a brownell mpo or something else

 

[Prebanpaul]

Personal opinion, I will never own a vortex again. Two of them fail, a ride in a trunk over a summer and hunting in the field. Granted they where Viper PST 2 but never again.

 

[Prebanpaul]

@Birddog6424 simmer down and go read what I wrote. What I wrote, was that I did not see a big enough difference in the quality of the glass, for the price increase. Never said there was not a difference. I just stated (personal opinion) that i did not see a big enough quality difference to justify the price. Again the XTR2 which I own 5 is still my favorite sub 1k scope.

 

[Birddog6424]

@Birddog6424 simmer down and go read what I wrote. What I wrote, was that I did not see a big enough difference in the quality of the glass, for the price increase. Never said there was not a difference. I just stated (personal opinion) that i did not see a big enough quality difference to justify the price. Again the XTR2 which I own 5 is still my favorite sub 1k scope.

I'm not upset. I have no issue with you stating your opinion.

I've read a lot of reviews on the XTR3. Including a few from some well-respected contributors on this forum. The glass in the XTR3 has been a pretty significant wow factor from just about everyone. In fact, in nearly every head to head comparison I've seen against the MK5, people like the XTR3 better. I know two guys whom I've mentioned in the past that I never thought would be Burris owners, one shoots for ZCO, the other is a friend of his who also owns a ZCO, (probably on a buddy deal ) Both of those fellas dished off their MK5s on their practice rifles in favor of the XTR3. One well known contributor here on the Hide liked his XTR3 over the MK5.

But dont get me wrong. I know that no scope will ever get universal love. It doesnt bother me that you went with a MK5 instead. XTR3 sales are great, and I'm sure like many other satisfied scope buyers you will enjoy your Leupold. It's a good scope and I hope you like yours. But forgive me for being incredulous that you dont see the value or justifiable price increase in the quality of the glass in the XTR3, when on average, it's as good or better than the MK5 or NX8 in head to head comparisons and comes in at a lower price.

I'll admit though it's possible the XTR3 you looked through just didnt have that pop?

I'm glad you like your XTRIIs. I've had quite a few of them over the years that treated me very well and I'm sure the folks at Burris as well as myself appreciate the good things you have said about it.

I hope you enjoy your new scope.

 

[Prebanpaul]

In my case the xtr 3 is not cheaper than the Mark 5. That is what this boiled down to. I got a mark 5 in the end for $1100. 1500 for the scope and I will sell the kestrel i get with it for 400. I dont get 70% my Burris anymore.

 

[Prebanpaul]

If your well connected to Burris, please tell them to update to a better reticle. A cross between nightforce MilX and the Minox MR4 would be awesome.

 

[Birddog6424]

If your well connected to Burris, please tell them to update to a better reticle. A cross between nightforce MilX and the Minox MR4 would be awesome.

Haha, it took forever to get the SCR2

I actually really like it from a design perspective. I'm not a fan of dots. But I think they really focused on target/competition, which I suppose shouldn't come as a surprise with the name being Special Competition Reticle.

Something a little thicker would have been better for a crossover scope though.

 

[Prebanpaul]

They are missing the boat on a tree reticle. Its not hard. Everyone is going to them.

 

[Birddog6424]

They are missing the boat on a tree reticle. Its not hard. Everyone is going to them.

They have a tree reticle.

This is in the XTR3 and the new RT6 Long Range.

SCR 2 MIL | Burris Optics

www.burrisoptics.com

And if you havent seen this thread, it's a great read. It has some good pics of the SCR2 and it's one of the most fair and comprehensive reviews I've seen so far on the XTR3. It's not a perfect scope, but a very solid competitor at its price point.

Rifle Scopes - Burris XTR III 3.3-18x50 mini review and comparison to Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50

Backstory The Burris XTR II has been the top of the line offering from the Greeley, CO sport optics company for many years now. Initial manufacture of these scopes had some issues optically, but Burris was able to rectify those over time and the latest XTR II is a pretty well refined scope for...

www.snipershide.com

 

[mike10]

I know I am late to the ball game here since this post is rather old, but having handled and used both I cast my vote for the Mark 5 over the NX8. Both are great scopes, but here is my opinion for anyone who cares.

Glass: The Mark 5 wins.

Mark 5 glass looked significantly better in my eye which is kind of crazy considering the two scopes are similarly priced. the NX8 glass was great, but just less great than the Mark 5 glass.


Turrets: The Mark 5 wins.

This was a win for the Mark 5 by a huge margin. The turrets on the Mark 5 were both crisper and more solid than the NX8. When holding the two scopes side by side and playing around with their turrets concurrently, the Mark 5 turrets felt both higher quality and more tactile. Each click on the Mark 5 turret is more audible compared to the NX8 turret to the point you can dial without looking and you know exactly where you are.

The NX8 turrets were honestly a bit mushy and soft for my liking especially for that amount of money. Additionally I should note that my preference is for larger turrets that are easier to grab and operate which also lands as an advantage the Mark 5 turrets have over the NX8 turrets. The Mark 5 turrets are as tall as NX8 turrets but are significantly wider.

Lastly the windage and elevation turrets of the Mark 5 seemed roughly identical in their stiffness and crispness with each click and the NX8 elevation turret seemed a bit softer than the windage. This is petty, but some people care about a discrepant feel to their windage turret when compared to their elevation turret.


Features: The Mark 5 wins.

The Mark 5 is more feature-rich than the NX8. One of the best things about the Mark 5 is its locking elevation Turret. When using the Mark 5 you do not have to worry about bumping your elevation turret off of zero because it locks on zero and does not move unless you release the lock by depressing a large button on the front of the turret. This, coupled with the covered elevation turret means you literally never have to worry about bumping either of your turrets off of zero because both the windage and elevation turrets have protections against that.

The NX8 is almost identical with the covered windage turret and a zero stop on the elevation turret, but because the elevation turret does not lock, it is possible the elevation turret gets erroneously dialed up. This can be a problem for competition shooters but is more likely to be problematic for hunters who, when faced with only a few moments to a get a shot off at an animal, may have had their elevation turret spun while hiking through rough country. I know loads of guys who missed shots because their turrets spun on them while hunting and after some time of feeling like absolute shit because they think the just plain missed the animals, look down to find that damn turret 6.75 MOA off its zero.

Another useful and well-planned feature on the Mark 5 is that the magnification ring does not extend too far right. I've never met someone with a bolt knob big enough to get caught on the Mark 5's throw lever while at full magnification because Leupold deliberately included that in the design of the scope. The NX8 extends further right on full magnification so that some bolt knobs on certain rifles might end up contacting the throw lever.

The Mark 5 also has more room for internal adjustment for those who care to stretch their rifles out to a mile or more. The Mark 5 offers 100 MOA of elevation adjustment in total with 72 MOA being available on a maximum of three revolutions. If you go the Mark 5 5-25x56 route then you'll have 120 MOA of total elevation adjustment. This contrasts with the NX8's 90 MOA of elevation adjustment and 26 mils available in total.

Another cool feature the Mark 5 has which is absent on the NX8 is a system that physically indicated to the shooter, on a mechanical level, where he or she is in terms of which revolution the elevation turret is on. This function conveys to the shooter which revolution the elevation is on by means of the turret's lock button retracting so as to be flush with the turret itself in contrast with its protrusion out of the turret while still within its first revolution. Additionally, the lock button advances further within the turret resulting in the button becoming substantially indented alongside another third-revolution-indication, specifically, the protrusion of a small button on the top of the turret. Most of us will never use this practically, but like illuminated reticles, it can come in handy when visibility is poor for whatever reason -- you can feel the elevation turret and know where you are in your dialing without having to see it. If you can't see how many Mils or Moa's you've come up, then you can dial down until you feel the locking button change to the flush or protruding position, and you will know exactly where you are and can dial from there counting each distinctly audible click.

Tracking: Tie.

I don't have much to say about this because I have never run extensive tracking tests on either of these, but what I can say is that both scopes tracked perfectly for me on plenty of occasions of using them pretty rigorously. Nightforce is known for great tracking so I would expect great tracking from any NF scope and likewise, military-grade Leupolds are known for great tracking as well.

Often times Leupold haters sometimes like to take lower-end Leupold scopes like the Leupold VX Freedom which costs like $400 and compare its tracking to a $3600 ATACR and be like "I once heard of a Leupold that tracked hehehe." Well no shit the ATACR will track better than scopes that fall a dozen tiers lower than it.

That said Leupold has a long history of their higher-end scopes tracking as good as anything else in their class. Hell, the Mark 4 has been helping military snipers hole-punch enemy soldiers since before Bill Clinton was getting BJs in the Oval Office.

And now, the Army Sniper Program just dished out big bucks for the Mark 5 as their new optic of choice for its new Barrett Mk22s.

I would anticipate based on my experience with both the Mark 5 and NX8, that the Mark 5 tracks as good if not better than the NX8 through extensive testing. Again, I have not done extensive testing of the tracking of both of these scopes myself, but rather, I have given both of them what most of you would call ordinary use. Extrapolating my current level of experience with both, I can't imagine they both don't perform well.


Conclusion: Both the Mark 5 and NX8 are phenomenal riflescopes and so many people would be satisfied with either. I focused primarily on areas where I thought the Mark 5 has a clear advantage over the NX8 here, but it has some drawbacks such as overpriced illumination models. If you get the chance to hold both in your hands or better yet, to be able to use them both on rifles, then you'll know which one you like best. As for me, I'd go Mark 5 all day because it felt, looked, and performed superiorly in my eyes.

Also, please don't lose your shit, Nightforce lovers. Nightforce makes some of the best scopes in the world and the NX8 is amazing. I just happened to like the Mark 5 better than that particular model of Nightforce scope. ATACR and the BEAST are the shit.

 

[mp0311]

I love the NX8 2.5-20x. The longer range is a push, and we do not see much demand. You did not mention which, so I assume the 2.5-20x. That is one of more popular scopes on the market today, and is solid. The Leupold Mark 5 HD in 3-18x is likewise a great scope, and the 2-25x does well with no complaints. The NF, I think, has a slight price advantage, and depending upon which mounts you have, you might be able to reuse a 30mm mount. I am not convinced that a 3-18x really benefits from 35mm tube.

At the end of the day, the NX8 is configured as a "last gen" scope (NXS) now magnified to 8x, but unbreakable, like the NXS. The Mark 5 is usually thought of as a 1/2 generation better glass, but not quite as good as an ATACR. We do mostly tactical scopes, and the NX8 is being used by Police SWAT snipers, but not military, while some Mark 5s are making their way into normal military roles.

Sorry, not being very helpful. My problem is I am an equal opportunity scope lover. I think of the NX8 as slightly more of a budget play in the 8x space, while the Mark 5 is a solid contender in the 5x market. Mostly a runner-up to ATACR and S&B and Steiner, but pretty close.

Do you currently think this is all true still? Tossing back and forth between the NX8, mk5 and atacr

 

[verdugo60]

Do you currently think this is all true still? Tossing back and forth between the NX8, mk5 and atacr

I was not super impressed with my 2.5-20 NX-8 on a crossover hunting/tactical rifle. On 2.5X the reticle was invisible, you had to bump it up to 4-5X to even see it. Glass seemed like a fish-bowl to me. In fairness, that was an early iteration, the 4-32 may be better. A friend of mine shoots the NX-8's and loves them.

I have several ZCO's which are awesome, they are hands above the ATACR in my opinion.

For the $2000 and under pricepoint I don't think the Leupold MK5HD 5-25 can be beat for most applications. They are not ZCO glass but the optical quality consistantly impresses me for the price and I love the PR-2 reticle...Jon Pynch and the boys knocked it out of the park with that one. Only downside is if you "need" illumination it will cost more. I have been running several of the MK5HD 5-25's on hunting and field comp guns and they have been awesome, great turret, tracking and glass for the money...plus they are LIGHT which is nice for making weight.

CS Tactical has them in stock right now, great people over there. @CSTactical

Leupold MARK 5HD 5-25x56mm - FFP

Pick up a Mark 5HD™ and you’ll feel the difference: it’s up to 20 ounces lighter than other scopes in its class.

cstactical.com