Rifle Scopes *JUST RELEASED* Nightforce NX8 FFP 1-8x24mm 30mm Tube & ATACR F1 1-8x24mm 34mm Tube Models
- Thread starter redneckbmxer24
- Start date
Wait, wasn't that supposed to be the NX8?
My prediction, the NX8's will be produced in SFP with very slight price reduction.
Either way, congrats to Nightforce! Killing it between this and USMC contract.
One Nightforce Optics NX8 1-8x24 FFP mil/mil display model in excellent shape for $1,515.00 ($200 off retail price) call us at 916-670-1103 to pick this one up.
Maybe the second focal plain scope will have a better FOV and better eyebox, as it is now, it is just not for me. Kind of like the old NXS 2.5-10 x 24 compact riflescope, for me, it is to much sacrifice just to get 8x and a small footprint.
I am a big fan of the 2.5-10x32 and like the NX8 a lot. It is much better, Just about perfect for clip on sights. I would like to try the ATACR
Love the NX8!
Last edited:
This thread has been enlightening!
I went in looking to be convinced to buy a NCS 1-8. But, in the end, I’ll probably end up with the Khales 1-6, swaro equivalent, or Steiner TX5.
I went in looking to be convinced to buy a NCS 1-8. But, in the end, I’ll probably end up with the Khales 1-6, swaro equivalent, or Steiner TX5.
Dialed my atacr 1-8 to 5 mil today. Moved back down to 1x and noticed how terrible the image was. Then I remembered I read I think somewhere in this thread that the 1x image degrades as you dial up. I dialed all the way down to zero and the image went back to perfect. I’m posting this because on both rifles that share this optic, they both require to be dialed to 2 mil and 3 mil in order to be properly zeroed. Because of that, the image isn’t as good as it could be at 1x. I feel like that’s a lot. 20-30 clicks of elevation to get zeroed. I do have the sticker still on. Dumb question maybe, but is it possible the sticker is causing that? One upper is a build, but the other is a KAC Mod 2. My lmt mrp which had also been zeroed with it only requires 0.7 mil adjustment to be properly zeroed. Anyone else run into this?
I doubt it’s the sticker, it would have to be pretty thick to create that big of a difference. However I would just take it off. It’s kind of like leaving the designer tag on the sleeve of a new suit.
ETA: In regard to your zeroing adjustment - the ATACR 1-8 on an LMT MWS with a 2.625" height over bore required 4.6 MIls of elevation for a 36yd zero.
Just as an FYI to your image quality issues, I sent my ATACR 1-8 back to NF, as the image resolution/focus/clarity was horrible at max magnification at around 125-150 yards and anything further. Oddly, at max magnification, I was able to clearly resolve and focus images as close as 17 yards with the reticle always in focus.
I compared the image to all my other scopes, including a Kahles K16i, and none of them exhibited this same issue. (Granted aside from the Kahles and an NX8, they're all ATACRs with higher magnification and parallax adjustment.) Looking through the Kahles at 6x, I could readily read/resolve wording on a range poster at 300 yards - not so with the ATACR 1-8 at 8x.
I messed with the diopter to verify that wasn't the problem, and it did not fix the issues. (I have 20/20 vision, and have never needed to adjust the ocular from factory settings on the 5 other NF scopes that I own.)
I couldn't really extract any specific info from NF about what they did, although they did agree the clarity they would have liked to see wasn't there, but they did *something* and now that I have it back, it's perfect. Images/focus/clarity are readily resolved at the closer 125+ ranges and to infinity. (within my eye's capability of course)
There is some glue reside at the objective lense seam - so I'm *assuming* they either replaced a lense, or adjusted the fixed parallax.
Last edited:
We just mounted up and took some pictures mounting up an NX8 in a Scalarworks mount , contact us if you'd like this combo.
In stock, ready to go
In stock, ready to go
The NX8 Mia reticle is terrible. I don't know why they used 1 moa hash marks. 2 would have been fine
I came to find an answer on this. as the mag goes up, the image quality seems to get blurry in a hurry. I messed with the diopter and have it where I consider perfect. at 300 the target (a 10" plate) is easily visible and hitable but it is NOT a crisp clear circle as when viewed through a 1/3rd the price trijicon tr26 at 8 or 12x. anybody got input?
My bet (*assumption*) is on where they have the fixed parallax set.
I do recall the person I spoke with over the phone casually mentioning something about the optic being dialed more toward the red dot side of its intended use (as in closer distances)
If that is the case, it doesn't make much sense to me, as I'd prefer the farther distances/images with this optic usage to be what is clear and sharp. I don't need such to be perfect at CQ/red dot distances, and the image at the low end of the mag range wasn't the problem anyway - of course I also wouldn't be using the high end of the mag range or the reticle at closer distances.
I could also readily see whatever I was looking at, as in your example, but nothing at the distances I mentioned were ever anywhere near clear/sharp/perfectly focused at 8x.
With the way that it is now, after having received it back from NF, the clarity and focus at the close-in distances while on max magnification are still just as good, but focusing on the target/image that close in does make the reticle go slightly out of focus - but as aforementioned, at the distances I will actually be using the reticle on 8x, the clarity/focus of both the reticle and image are perfect, and I couldn't be more pleased.
Last edited:
This is exactly why I held out for the S&B dual CC.
Cc mode = 7 meter parallax and everything else is 100 meters.
Seems to solve a lot of this.
welp. im feeling dumb af.
I did everything I found online about setting the diopter properly inside my home. were talking... 40-50 ft hallway distance.
I took it down the road where I could view an ~750yd building with normal home sized windows. it was blurry af and i decided unless the target is triple human size there was no way I was going to distinguish it.
before I drove away I decided to mess with the diopter again. all the way out and work it IN. when I had arrived here, my diopeter was set 2.7 turns in. reticle was sharp as could be and 100yds was VERY clear.
so in doing this excersize of adjusting the diopeter at a VERY long distance, i was able to make the building 10000% more clear. I will second that what you said about the reticle, i think it was just eye fatigue but I felt like i was looking past the reticle and seeing a PERFECTLY clear image of the building, but my eye would focus back and the reticle would be very sharp. it was a happy medium and I will fine tune it slightly next time Im at the range. as it sits right now I could smoke the tail light out of a truck at 750ish if I wanted to or a man sized target standing in one of the windows. it made THAT big of a difference.
in closing, adjust your diopter at something far away. it was the difference between looking through some well used safety glasses and a microscope. literal 1000% improvement.
I did everything I found online about setting the diopter properly inside my home. were talking... 40-50 ft hallway distance.
I took it down the road where I could view an ~750yd building with normal home sized windows. it was blurry af and i decided unless the target is triple human size there was no way I was going to distinguish it.
before I drove away I decided to mess with the diopter again. all the way out and work it IN. when I had arrived here, my diopeter was set 2.7 turns in. reticle was sharp as could be and 100yds was VERY clear.
so in doing this excersize of adjusting the diopeter at a VERY long distance, i was able to make the building 10000% more clear. I will second that what you said about the reticle, i think it was just eye fatigue but I felt like i was looking past the reticle and seeing a PERFECTLY clear image of the building, but my eye would focus back and the reticle would be very sharp. it was a happy medium and I will fine tune it slightly next time Im at the range. as it sits right now I could smoke the tail light out of a truck at 750ish if I wanted to or a man sized target standing in one of the windows. it made THAT big of a difference.
in closing, adjust your diopter at something far away. it was the difference between looking through some well used safety glasses and a microscope. literal 1000% improvement.
And also why I'd like to see adjustable parallax on these type of scopes. I didn't want to spend the money for a pricey 1-8 but your scope or a March with AP is what I would have preferred.
I still had the same issues irrespective of how I adjusted the diopter.
Great if that worked for you, but I do wonder if it doesn't induce other issues at different magnification settings and ranges. Technically the diopter should be focused for the reticle at infinity, and against a background that doesn't offer any sort of image to focus on (flat white wall, clear blue sky, etc.) and without focusing on the reticle for any more than 1-2 seconds, as the eye will correct for a possibly out of focus reticle.
I still think it's an issue of what distance NF has the fixed parallax set at - but it's also a limitation of a design with a fixed parallax setting. Hence the design that DL32 mentioned, which makes the optic go back and forth between 2 fixed parallax settings, contingent on the magnification setting. But, this issue could still arise without an actual parallax adjustment knob, depending how they have the parallax set for the FFP reticle.
S&B states parallax free to 7m for the SFP red dot, and to 100m for the FFP reticle, whereas NF states their fixed parallax is at 125y. So 125 and beyond should be parallax free and in focus, but mine seemed to work the exact opposite when on max magnification. (Everything short of 125 was in focus at 8x, and any image beyond that range would never be clear or fully resolved.)
With whatever change NF made to my scope, any complaints I had with it have been resolved, and the only time both the image and reticle are not perfectly focused together, is when I'm at max magnification and looking at an object as close as 17-25 yards in - but again, I wouldn't be using the magnified reticle at those distances anyway,
Last edited:
I'm jumping late into the game, but just bought an NX8. Anyone with decent mileage on it? I'm coming from a Razor and I know I will lose FoV and eyebox at 1x. Hoping max mag performance will make up for it though as I am at 6X far more than 1X with the Razor.
This scope has too tight of an eyebox for me, and there are other LPV's that are much easier for me to use on all magnification. I will have to pass on it.
Im hearing a-lot of complaints of tight eye-box on the NX8 and that is a shame.The NX8 is the right size and weight for me and i like the reticle but i hate a tight eye-box on a scope.I would love to see a NX6 come out in 2nd focal plane with a generous eye-box and the same reticle.
If you do positional shooting then the eyebox may be an issue if you are laying down on your side or back or something unusual. As for just bringing the rifle up on target I have had zero issue.
The reticle on the ATACR works well on 1X in heavy woods even without the illumination on.
Still very usable in this manner against larger targets when facing into late afternoon sun and looking into the darkness of heavily shaded brush. I assume the NX8 is similar with the same 3 heavy bars pointing to the center.
Still very usable in this manner against larger targets when facing into late afternoon sun and looking into the darkness of heavily shaded brush. I assume the NX8 is similar with the same 3 heavy bars pointing to the center.
Similar threads
