If you had to choose and why and reasons, Leupold mk4hd vs Mk 5 HD vs NF nX8. This will be a high end varmint (coyote and bobcat)/long range target 6mm build. Thanks!
Leupold mark 5 AND 4 HD vs NF (Specifically pr2 vs mil xt) Why?
- Thread starter Tkirkpatrick
- Start date
Whatever you like more.
For hunting I'd have a hard time choosing an NX8 based on the eye box. It just irritates me.
For hunting I'd have a hard time choosing an NX8 based on the eye box. It just irritates me.
The mk5 is a much better optic than the nx8. Better eyebox, better optics, better reticles,ect. The ATACR is more comparable to the mk5.
If you switch to the MK4HD ( which I am a big fan) you can get the 6-24x52 with a PR3. I have a bunch of them now because every gun can't get a ZCO.
If you switch to the MK4HD ( which I am a big fan) you can get the 6-24x52 with a PR3. I have a bunch of them now because every gun can't get a ZCO.
I just sort of went through this, though I was looking for a a mid range variable.
I have a mk 4 6-24 on a 17hmr, a mark 5 3.6-18 on a 22, and I just took possession of a atacr 4-16x42 for a centerfire.
For the money the mark 4 is excellent. The mark 4 and 5 show CA especially on backgrounds like snow with shadows. Image quality is good/great in both.
I’ve only looked through the atacr for about an hour meddling. One thing that stood out to me was how much better depth of field was on a focused target. The atacr also appears to have more pop or contrast perhaps. I’d generally give Nightforce an edge in clarity as well. Mk4/5 seem clear but they give a sort of muted flat image vs Nightforce where more layers of depth feel in focus and it’s easier to pick apart specific areas, especially layers of vegetation.
Saying all that they are all nice scopes, by feel I think the dials on the leupolds are actually more to my preference. The zero stop on the atacr is more positive and solid. Haven’t mounted and done any tracking/dialing with the nf but they have a solid reputation. I have not had any tracking issues with my leupolds, and I crank on the elevation constantly with the mk 5 on the 22x.
A friend has an nx8 2.5-20 on a 7prc. I eyeballed it for 10 minutes one day as I was considering it. The adjustments for windage and elevation are the worst of the four scopes I’ve discussed. The eyebox also lives up to its reputation for being fickle at high mag. The color and ca control is good, but I noticed the depth of field was narrower and the scope seemed to struggle when you’d look at a bank of grass or a wood edge, it just did not have the resultion that the atacr I have now does. I don’t think it’s better than a mark 5 either in that sense.
After saying all that it’s worth saying that all of these scopes are still damn nice compared to a $3-700 optic. I’m happy with all of my purchases and look forward to continuing to shoot with them and compare them in the future.
I have a mk 4 6-24 on a 17hmr, a mark 5 3.6-18 on a 22, and I just took possession of a atacr 4-16x42 for a centerfire.
For the money the mark 4 is excellent. The mark 4 and 5 show CA especially on backgrounds like snow with shadows. Image quality is good/great in both.
I’ve only looked through the atacr for about an hour meddling. One thing that stood out to me was how much better depth of field was on a focused target. The atacr also appears to have more pop or contrast perhaps. I’d generally give Nightforce an edge in clarity as well. Mk4/5 seem clear but they give a sort of muted flat image vs Nightforce where more layers of depth feel in focus and it’s easier to pick apart specific areas, especially layers of vegetation.
Saying all that they are all nice scopes, by feel I think the dials on the leupolds are actually more to my preference. The zero stop on the atacr is more positive and solid. Haven’t mounted and done any tracking/dialing with the nf but they have a solid reputation. I have not had any tracking issues with my leupolds, and I crank on the elevation constantly with the mk 5 on the 22x.
A friend has an nx8 2.5-20 on a 7prc. I eyeballed it for 10 minutes one day as I was considering it. The adjustments for windage and elevation are the worst of the four scopes I’ve discussed. The eyebox also lives up to its reputation for being fickle at high mag. The color and ca control is good, but I noticed the depth of field was narrower and the scope seemed to struggle when you’d look at a bank of grass or a wood edge, it just did not have the resultion that the atacr I have now does. I don’t think it’s better than a mark 5 either in that sense.
After saying all that it’s worth saying that all of these scopes are still damn nice compared to a $3-700 optic. I’m happy with all of my purchases and look forward to continuing to shoot with them and compare them in the future.
Having beat the shit out of several Mk 5HD's this year, including a nasty yard sale involving a spooked horse, I've had nothing but a positive experience with the Leupy's. I've ran ATACR's on work rifles because that is what we were issued. The reticles we had sucked ass for sniper work (MOAR) but everything else was good to go. I've purchased, installed, and shot dozens of NX8's on customers rifles and personally cannot stand that scope. The eye box sucks, and the glass just isnt as good as it should be for the money. Look at an NX8 side by side with a MK5 HD and the leupold beats it easily in all respects. I did recently get behind an ATACR 5-25 with the Mil XT reticle and and really liked that scope, but didn't feel like the glass was $1600 or whatever better than the 5-25 Mark 5 HD that sat next to it. Just my opinions.
Thanks gents,
I have older Fud leupolds from hand me down rifles and like them a lot. I have an older NF NXS and just not super impressed with the glass or turrets. It is a solid scope though as it’s been lots of miles in the mountains. So I’ve been leaning more towards leupy. It will be beat up but not anything crazy because I like to take care of my shit.
Next question is, comparing mk5 to mk4. Is Mk 5 worth the extra ~$600 or no? (5-25 mk5 vs 6-24 Mk 4) I will go with the Pr2 reticle for sure. Which leads to how small is that reticle at 5-6x non-illuminated, say when a yote is rolling in hot close and I have it at lowest power? Will I still be able to see it? I would prefer not to pay for illumination. This will be my first, first focal plane and I know they can get pretty small at low zoom. Most shots realistically will range from 150-400 yds but they will roll in within 30 yds sometimes. Also compare 5 vs 6x at that close range. I know a 3-18 ish scope would probably be better for my type of hunting but I want to have the extra mag for target to become a better long range shooter etc..
Thanks!
I have older Fud leupolds from hand me down rifles and like them a lot. I have an older NF NXS and just not super impressed with the glass or turrets. It is a solid scope though as it’s been lots of miles in the mountains. So I’ve been leaning more towards leupy. It will be beat up but not anything crazy because I like to take care of my shit.
Next question is, comparing mk5 to mk4. Is Mk 5 worth the extra ~$600 or no? (5-25 mk5 vs 6-24 Mk 4) I will go with the Pr2 reticle for sure. Which leads to how small is that reticle at 5-6x non-illuminated, say when a yote is rolling in hot close and I have it at lowest power? Will I still be able to see it? I would prefer not to pay for illumination. This will be my first, first focal plane and I know they can get pretty small at low zoom. Most shots realistically will range from 150-400 yds but they will roll in within 30 yds sometimes. Also compare 5 vs 6x at that close range. I know a 3-18 ish scope would probably be better for my type of hunting but I want to have the extra mag for target to become a better long range shooter etc..
Thanks!
On my mk5 (pr1moa) the reticle becomes a fine duplex at 3.6.it becomes useful for measurement between 6 and 8x. I will say the reticle can be problematic at last light and low power, so illumination is useful for a hunting scope.
The 6-24 mk4 has a pr3mil reticle and is somewhat usable at 6x, but it becomes much easier to use between 8 and 10x. I will say the eyebox on the 6-24 is more fickle than my mark5, especially over 18x.
I’ve never compared a 5-25mk5 to my mk4, so I can’t help you with that. I do really enjoy the mk4 and I really like Leupold use of dots for the center aiming point.
The 6-24 mk4 has a pr3mil reticle and is somewhat usable at 6x, but it becomes much easier to use between 8 and 10x. I will say the eyebox on the 6-24 is more fickle than my mark5, especially over 18x.
I’ve never compared a 5-25mk5 to my mk4, so I can’t help you with that. I do really enjoy the mk4 and I really like Leupold use of dots for the center aiming point.
Mk V are also fairly ligh which comes in handy on many builds, so there's more to it than just price/glass etc. Downfall of mk V is whether or not you are OK with the FOV being limited. Also, the illumination typically missing at the price-points most people are looking at (ie nx8 pricing).
Glass quality aside, and my personal preferences and bias aside... Based on personal experience dealing with many Leupolds while working at the gun store. And, I've also personally owned many Leupolds over the years, that were good scopes that never let me down, but I also didn't beat them around...
If it's going to be getting knocked-around and beat up up in the mountains with rocks and boulders under every step you take, I would stay away from Leupold (or any other lightweight hunting scopes). Lightweight scopes are lightweight for a reason...Because the main tubes, internals, and glass lenses are very thin and lightweight, to keep the scope lightweight. Which does not bode well during heavy bumps and drops, repeated heavy recoil, etc... They are not known for being robust optics, they are known for being lightweight very light-use hunting optics, regardless of what the fanboys try to convince you of. There's a reason why the government swapped from the Leupold MK-4 dumpster fire, and went to the ATACR. I'm not going to tell you what to buy, but if this is what you're wanting the scope for, and want real reliability and ruggedness, I wouldn't buy anything Leupold or anything super lightweight from any other brand, given your terrain.
All of my MK5s came with an FOV increasing dial that has numbers on it that go from 5 to 25.
-Stan
The 2024 ELR season would disagree with this. I put 1500 rounds of 338 Lapua Improved downrage with a MK5 Hd 7-35, over half of which were in ELR light class. Bouncing around in side by sides, truck beds, and never so much as a hiccup. This is after a couple years of doing this stuff. I held off on Leupold stuff for years because of the old durability issues and now I run these scopes harder than anything I own. The 3.6-18 MK5 was on a 30 Nosler with me on a back country elk hunt last fall. Horses spooked and got wrapped up with eachother, ripping the back cinch on my scabbard off. The rifle came part way out and the horse took off full gallop with the rifle bouncing across the ground, after being bashed up with the horses were tangled. I thought my hunt was over after that. We got back to camp and set out a target at 100 yards. Absolutely 0 POI shift. Same rifle survived a nasty dirt bike crash on some single track with a bunch of fallen timber. No issues. I've never had any other scope survive that abuse. Even some of our issued Nightforce scopes would come off zero a tenth or two after bouncing around in vehicles. Maybe I just have a bunch of absolute tank scopes, but I'm pretty sure they are built well and hold zero. There isn't another scope in that price range that holds up in terms of quality and durability. And I'm definitely not a fan boy, I run a mix of TT, S&B, NF, Athlon, and the Leupold stuff. I could care less about brand name as long as the scope has good glass, tracks, and holds up. I have heard anecdotal evidence stating the VX6 still suffers from some issues, but that is an entirely different animal.
Any scope can fail. My Tangent Theta TT525P just went back to TT after the parallax went dead at the beginning of a PRS match. That scope lives on a little 6 BRA and gets babied. We've had Nightforce go down on 308 sniper rifles on my old team. I watched a buddies Swaro take a shit in the middle of the 2024 Nightforce ELR match. Shit happens. I think Leupold came out swinging with the MK5HD series of scopes after having a stagnant period in sales, and frequent reports of older scopes shitting the bed.
Regarding what the government buys, I give that absolutely zero weight. My experience with those contracts, the are largely dictated by bullshit deals to line peoples pockets and get whatever kickbacks they can, not necessarily with the "best gear for the troops" in mind.
Agreed, they all fail. Leupold builds a great scope. The original MK4 was a tough and reliable scope. If you look at how many the Army had and how long they were in service and how many were on the Barrett, it’s impressive. Hell, think about all the Leupold’s that had permanent residence at the school house and just kept on ticking class after class.
Leupold knows how to build a reliable rifle scope.
All those things are easier on a lighter scope. The heavier they are the more inertia is generated.
So long as each component is heavy duty enough to secure what it needs to you don't need to build it excessively heavy.
This is why they have the punisher. Beat them to death and improve what broke.
But, there will always be those who equate heavy to strong. There's plenty of those options also, but you won't catch me carrying them.
The switch to ATACR was typical contract procurement. They also started buying Mark 6 and Mark 8 scopes. Just depended on the contract.
Well, when you’ve personally packed up and sent back as many as I have for customers, that were mostly on lightweight .270’s and .30-06’s (2 of the most common Alabama deer hunting cartridges)… You equate the two factors to correlate with one another. Light gun + snappy recoil + lightweight scope = bad combination for wrecking internals. Sent back several Swaro’a for what we could figure was the same reason, too. No external damage, just internals rattling loose. We never sent back any NF NXS’s that I can recall, and very few S&B PM-II’s. Ironically, we never sent back any lightweight Zeiss scopes for internal damage, unless it was caused by something external (dropped, ran over, fell out of the treestand, etc…)
During what years did this personal packing up occur?
What was the sales to personal pack up ratio roughly?
-Stan
I’ll never own another NF because I don’t like their reticles. Mil Xt is entirely way too busy for me.
Pr2 is probably one of the best reticles on the market. But it’s leupold
The Zeiss s3 or razor g3 should also be considered.
I shoot a zco next to my s3 at a match yesterday, my eyes has a hard time telling the difference. The zco was better, but double the price better? Probably not. At least not for someone who doesn’t have unlimited funds.
Pr2 is probably one of the best reticles on the market. But it’s leupold
The Zeiss s3 or razor g3 should also be considered.
I shoot a zco next to my s3 at a match yesterday, my eyes has a hard time telling the difference. The zco was better, but double the price better? Probably not. At least not for someone who doesn’t have unlimited funds.
Not really... We sold a fair bit, but nothing to lopside sales numbers. We actually sold more Swaro, Kahles, and Zeiss when we could. But some customers were adamant about "...Buh...Buh...Buh... Muh' grandpappy used one, my daddy used one, and a gold-ring Loo-pold is the best scope ever made!" folks...So, of course, they were going to buy one. That's the mentality of the average Alabama deer hunter. Also, they seem to think that a .308 Win can't kill deer beyond 250-300 yards, and that they definitely needed a .300 WinMag (or now a .300 PRC) to shoot 110 lbs. whitetail does at 400-500 yards tops. You know, because they wear kevlar vests...And definitely don't get killed every year with pointy sticks moving at 300 FPS from a piece of equipment that was first developed during the Paleolithic Era (about 71,000 years ago)...
We started referring to it as "little dick syndrome" or "LDS" for short when customers were around.
Last edited:
This was over 22 years ago, and I don't know sales records off the top of my head, because they weren't important for me to remember. I do remember which items were more popular, and which ones we sent a lot back of from poor quality... More Savage 10/110 rifles than anything else during that time frame, which is why I still won't own one of those POS's.
