I did some searching on here and couldn’t find a real dedicated thread towards this topic. Really liking the 3.6-18 and 2.5-20 magnification ranges that these two scopes offer. I currently own all nightforce ATACR and SHV scopes for my long guns but I’ve owned a MK6 3-18 in the past and I can appreciate how light they are and quality of glass. I have not had a chance to take a look through either the NX8 or MK5 and just wanted to open it up and get some opinions from those of you who have had some time on either or both of these. This would probably replace my 4-16 ATACR on my 6.5 Creedmoor as an all around gun for hunting and long range shooting just to get that extra magnification for the longer range stuff. Any recommendations or just experience with either?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Leupold MK5 vs Nightforce NX8
- Thread starter Atlas11B
- Start date
There both so nice imo, running the mark5 now on a few rifles and an shv on my 22-250 hunting rifle. Also have some experience with the nx8 and atacr. It’s one of those where you could just let the coin decide or whichever has the retical that really speaks to you. I’m diggin the mark5 right now cause I think the cch retical is really working for me. I know that wasn’t much help but hard to pick. Right now I’d say pick the mark5!
I would stick with the 4-16 ATACR or go MK5. I think that the ATACR line is great and hard to beat. But, if you are wanting more magnification I would definitely go with the MK5. I love my MK5. the weight and glass and overall value for the money is much better than the NX8 line. I was a little disappointed with the NX8 line. For the price the MK5 has better glass and features.
I appreciate the input fellas! I’m definitely a Nightforce guy but that MK5 does seem to be impressive, I might just have to pick one up and try it out myself. I just wish Nightforce would make the ATACR with a better magnification range. I got rid of my ATACR 5-25 simply because it was just too big and heavy. I love the 4-16 and like the idea of the 2.5-20 but I’ve owned NXS in the past and I would take an ATACR or mk6 over that lineup so for the time being it sounds like a MK5 is the better choice
I've been behind a couple MK5's and they are all solid. I was completely talked into a NX8, until I heard about how tight their eyebox is. I have yet to get behind one to verify. But I've read a handful of stories from guys on the Hide that have strong opinions about it.
Let’s keep this topic alive, as I am also torn on these two optics.
From everything I’ve heard, MK5> NX8.
I went MK5 and have not been disappointed.
The weight, the glass, the warranty, and the long history of the company made it an easy choice.
I went MK5 and have not been disappointed.
The weight, the glass, the warranty, and the long history of the company made it an easy choice.
Any pics of the reticle at low and high power?
I’m leaving heavily towards getting a 5-25 TMR illum due to it being a little thicker so easier to see at Low power/light in the woods hunting
Here’s a picture of the illuminated TMR on my 3.6-18. I forget what power this was on at the time. I think it’s about 12x The target is 640 yds and the one further back is 750.
I really like the reticle. I didn’t realize it had a floating dot untilI got the scope.
I really like the reticle. I didn’t realize it had a floating dot untilI got the scope.
Leupold doesn't market it well but the illuminated version has the floating dot whereas non-illuminated is open center. Thank you for the pic. I will be going with the 5-25 TMR illum.
So I did a side by side between a 7-35 MK5 and a 7-35 ATACR. Ultimately some colors popped slightly different when going between them (not necessarily better, just different). I ended up going with the NF because I really like the MIL XT reticle and like the wider range of parallax adjustment. Now bear in mind this is a double edge sword. It is great to have that adjustability but it becomes super finicky the more you go up in magnification.
A little late but I just wanted to add some input for those who might be looking at these scopes.
I was looking at these two and was torn on which to purchase, so I purchased them both to see which I liked more.
I am very new to this whole thing so I do not know about all the minute details about the internals of the scopes etc.
I ended up going with the Mark 5 for the following reasons,
Turrets:
The Mark 5 turret clicks felt great and sounded great as well, better imo than the NF. So if you are looking for audible, clicky turrets the Mark 5 wins.
Illumination:
I definitely preferred the illumination adjustment on the Mark 5 over the NF. On the NF there is a button that you have to hold down to adjust illumination as opposed to the turret style illumination adjustment on the Mark 5. My personal preference was the Mark 5.
Indicators:
Additionally, on the Mark 5, I really like the metal prong that pops up on your second revolution, giving you a tactile indication of where you are. The NF did not have this indication from what I recall. Remember I'm new so maybe I missed it.
Clarity:
As far as clarity, I preferred the Mark 5.
Customer Service and Company Reviews:
I had read in many places about NF's customer service not being great. Of course, I do not know how their customer service is personally, but I was not willing to chance it after reading the number of negative reviews left by others. I read more positive reviews regarding Leupold's customer service. I did have experience with their customer service and it was great. This was very important to me on my decision, that is, how well a company treats its customers.
I hope this might help others who may share similar preferences which I think it comes down to when choosing between these two ie, personal preference.
More Details for those interested:
Reticles
Being new to this, I wasn't sure about which reticle I would like between a clean reticle or a tree reticle, so what I did was ordered a tree reticle on the NF and a clean reticle on the Mark 5. On the NF I ordered a Mil-Xt, and on the Mark 5 a TMR. I ended up preferring a cleaner reticle, ie, TMR. However, I'm sure the Mil-Xt is really awesome for certain shooters. Being new, I wanted to start with something simple and clean. Maybe in the future, I will go with a tree-reticle. Just a quick not regarding Mil-Xt reticle, I wasn't able to see the holdover dots very well until really zooming in, maybe around 9 or 10 power, I can't remember exactly, but just remember thinking, "wow, you really need to be zoomed in to be able to see clearly the holdover dots".
I was looking at these two and was torn on which to purchase, so I purchased them both to see which I liked more.
I am very new to this whole thing so I do not know about all the minute details about the internals of the scopes etc.
I ended up going with the Mark 5 for the following reasons,
Turrets:
The Mark 5 turret clicks felt great and sounded great as well, better imo than the NF. So if you are looking for audible, clicky turrets the Mark 5 wins.
Illumination:
I definitely preferred the illumination adjustment on the Mark 5 over the NF. On the NF there is a button that you have to hold down to adjust illumination as opposed to the turret style illumination adjustment on the Mark 5. My personal preference was the Mark 5.
Indicators:
Additionally, on the Mark 5, I really like the metal prong that pops up on your second revolution, giving you a tactile indication of where you are. The NF did not have this indication from what I recall. Remember I'm new so maybe I missed it.
Clarity:
As far as clarity, I preferred the Mark 5.
Customer Service and Company Reviews:
I had read in many places about NF's customer service not being great. Of course, I do not know how their customer service is personally, but I was not willing to chance it after reading the number of negative reviews left by others. I read more positive reviews regarding Leupold's customer service. I did have experience with their customer service and it was great. This was very important to me on my decision, that is, how well a company treats its customers.
I hope this might help others who may share similar preferences which I think it comes down to when choosing between these two ie, personal preference.
More Details for those interested:
Reticles
Being new to this, I wasn't sure about which reticle I would like between a clean reticle or a tree reticle, so what I did was ordered a tree reticle on the NF and a clean reticle on the Mark 5. On the NF I ordered a Mil-Xt, and on the Mark 5 a TMR. I ended up preferring a cleaner reticle, ie, TMR. However, I'm sure the Mil-Xt is really awesome for certain shooters. Being new, I wanted to start with something simple and clean. Maybe in the future, I will go with a tree-reticle. Just a quick not regarding Mil-Xt reticle, I wasn't able to see the holdover dots very well until really zooming in, maybe around 9 or 10 power, I can't remember exactly, but just remember thinking, "wow, you really need to be zoomed in to be able to see clearly the holdover dots".
