Rifle Scopes NF or SWFA scope??

[snipedogg]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LawnMM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Snipedogg</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LawnMM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just to point out an observation I will add this...

The SS 5-20 is their flagship these days in my understanding, HD glass, newest model, illuminated, feature list, etc.

Is it fair to compare it to NF's from years prior, when these days, the F1 is their stallion?

I will say this, the glass on the 3-9x SS I had was quite good. I believe detail, with mirage present, was better with my F1. That shouldn't be taken as a knock against SWFA. I don't expect them to produce a scope that performs on level with scopes that cost three times as much. My point is, depending on which scopes you are comparing, it may not be a fair comparison.

I have not had my eye behind a 5-20 SS, but would not mind meeting up with somebody at CRC to give it a whirl. Shoot some steel and compare glass.

Rich </div></div>

Not sure, but I don't believe there is any difference in quality between the glass on any Nighforce scopes. The differences are in the options and magnifications </div></div>

I've read on this site that older NF glass hasn't been up to snuff with more recent stuff, particularly the F1, couldn't say myself...I can only afford the one so far! </div></div>

That may or may not be true, but what I meant is that at this point in time, there isn't a difference between all the scopes they put out. They all get the same glass and same internal parts. Only differences are features like ZS and what magnification the scope is. NF does not make a bottom line scope.

 

[HugoStiglitz]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

Glad to hear the positive feedback for the NF.

 

[michael_aos]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: D_TROS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Forgot to add (and I think its ben touched on here) another thing that I really dislike about this scope, the SS, is the location of the paralax knob. It is hard to get to behind the illumination knob. That is a huge nuisance. </div></div>

Yes!! This is just stupid. If anything they should have swapped the parallax & illumination positions.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: D_TROS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also, when I ordered the scope, I was looking forward to the paralax knob being adjustable down to 35 yards (mainly because this is for my 22 LR). Mine is only adjustable down to 50 yards. Dont know why the change, but it irritating they changed it. </div></div>

Yes! My first one is a 35yd, but the next two are 50yd. No mention or even acknowledgement of the change on their website.
--

 

[XTR]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

Since I made the comment earlier about the illumination I'll update it here.

I got a replacement from SWFA, and it does the same thing. I'm not sure that the woman I talked to on the phone fully understood my comments. There is a note on the inventory form to inspect the scope before shipping. I'm returning the "replacement".

What I noticed was that against a dark background in daylight the illumination works as intended (center dot), but in low light conditions, as in the early morning, or late evening, the entire mil-quad section of the reticle is illuminated and fuzzy. The fuzzy may be my eyes, I had Lasik done 9 yrs ago and haloing is a side effect. I don't notice it unless I concentrate on a light at night. I don't get that effect from my other lighted reticles.

 

[dk-1]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

I know I will be flamed here for saying the following, but I will share my OPINION anyway...

FWIW, I saved all my pennies for some time and upgraded to a NF NXS from a Mark 4. I felt the quality of the NF glass was on par with some very inexpensive hunting scopes I had used in the past, mostly in the $200 range. I compared it next to my Vari-x II and the NF was inferior. I could never get a crisp image at any distance and the reticle would not focus for me. It was as if I could either focus on the target or the reticle, but not both at the same time. The glass also had a grayish blue hue to it. It bothered me to the point that I thought it was a fake, but I ordered it through Optics Planet, so I knew it was GTG. I called NF CS and explained the problem to them. They said it should not be that way, so I sent it in for a check up. About two weeks later I got a call from NF who explained that something in the diopter was out of whack and they fixed it. When I got the scope back I was unable to distinguish any difference from when I originally sent it in. I ended up selling it and went back to a Mark 4. The mark 4 was leaps and bounds better than the NF in optical quality. There are some who will say that NF is the most reliable, but I have never had a durability/reliability issue with the 3 Mark 4's I have owned. I have since looked through two other NF NXS scopes and the same poor optical quality was noticed. I don't know if it makes any difference, but I do have better than 20/10 vision in both eyes, maybe I can just distinguish these small variances in optical quality better than others. I have not seen any of the new SS scopes in person, so I cannot comment on them. For me, I will never spend my hard earned money on any NF product again....

 

[Texar2]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

Due to funding I went from an S&B 4-16 to a sshd 5-20 and I have not found myself missing the S&B. Not saying they are equal. Just saying that I do not feel handicapped and I have not noticed a difference in my shooting. This is my third HD model and I have had no problems with them. The glass is super bright and they track perfectly. I do not find the lack of a zero stop to be a problem as it does not take more than one rev to get me to a thousand. I also do not mind the wide reticle, it is easy to pick up and great for practical shooting.

 

[Jon A]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I noticed was that against a dark background in daylight the illumination works as intended (center dot), but in low light conditions, as in the early morning, or late evening, the entire mil-quad section of the reticle is illuminated and fuzzy. The fuzzy may be my eyes, I had Lasik done 9 yrs ago and haloing is a side effect.</div></div>
Yes, this was discussed quite a bit in the past. Some illumination bleed onto the rest of the reticle is a function of how the reticle is made; in order to change it other things would have to be changed about the reticle. It's mostly noticeable when you have the illumination set higher than is needed for the conditions.

I have several illuminated scopes that don't do this either and their illuminated reticles are much "prettier" but don't function as well in the field because they emit too much light even on the lowest settings. So when it's really dark, the reticle sure looks pretty but you can no longer see the target.

I'd suggest actually trying to shoot something in the dark with it next to some other scopes to see how it functions before sending it back as you may discover the bleed, while an annoyance, doesn't impede function at all.

As for how it compares with NF; if the illumination is important to you remember the NF is not easily field adjustable at all. If it's set bright enough to be useful on low powers/low light then on higher powers and darker conditions you're left with it being much brighter than optimal. In my experience hunting with numerous FFP scopes, the ability to adjust the illumination is very important as conditions change.

 

[SScott]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jon A</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes, this was discussed quite a bit in the past. Some illumination bleed onto the rest of the reticle is a function of how the reticle is made; in order to change it other things would have to be changed about the reticle. <span style="color: #CC0000">It's mostly noticeable when you have the illumination set higher than is needed for the conditions</span>.

I have several illuminated scopes that don't do this either and their illuminated reticles are much "prettier" but don't function as well in the field because they emit too much light even on the lowest settings. So when it's really dark, the reticle sure looks pretty but you can no longer see the target.

<span style="color: #CC0000">I'd suggest actually trying to shoot something in the dark with it next to some other scopes to see how it functions before sending it back as you may discover the bleed, while an annoyance, doesn't impede function at all.</span>

As for how it compares with NF; if the illumination is important to you remember the NF is not easily field adjustable at all. If it's set bright enough to be useful on low powers/low light then on higher powers and darker conditions you're left with it being much brighter than optimal. In my experience hunting with numerous FFP scopes, the ability to adjust the illumination is very important as conditions change. </div></div>

Thanks for touching on these points Jon.
When I first got my two SS HD's I compared them to my Nightforce 5.5-22x50 both during the day and at dusk. While at dusk and testing the illumination, the first thing I noticed on my Nightforce (yes I had never actually tested my Nightforce at dusk) was that it's reticle was too bright. It's funny, it had always looked great when I turned it on during the day or with the objective cap closed. The SS's ability to adjust the intesity was a real bonus, and one other thing is that since the scope is FFP the illumination intensity at 5X is not the same as on 20X.
Last weekend while shooting with a buddy at a 1,000 yard range testing my comeups, it was starting to get dark, and before we wrapped up for the day I compared my SS to his Nightforce 3-15X50 NXS( I was looking for glass clarity and brightness). I lowered the magnification down so they woud be equal, and I have to say that I was quite impressed with how the SS did, I'm glad I bought two of them.
SScott

 

[Jon A]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

As to the OP’s original question, in my opinion the choice depends upon what features you want the most. As of right now, the two companies don’t make scopes with the same features for an apples-to-apples choice. So, as I feel quality is very similar between the two brands, the choice will come down to which features you want the most.

If you want SFP, obviously the NF wins.

If you want FFP, the choice you’re left with is two scopes with significantly different power levels—3-15 or 5-20. While there is much overlap in capability, if what’s really important to you is seeing fine detail at long range (bullet holes in targets, points on a distant buck, etc) the SS wins easily. If a larger FOV for brush hunting is more important, the NF wins easily.

If illumination adjustability is important to you, the SS wins.

If you want a zero stop, the NF wins.

Reputation for durability goes to NF as the 5-20 is much too new to match it right now no matter how durable they prove to be over time.

Then there is reticle choice which is your own personal preference. A year ago I would have said the SS had a huge advantage over the MLR, but now NF offers several nice FFP reticles that should do the job nicely and most will be happy with.

If you’ve used enough different scopes to have a feel for what you want feature-wise, the choice should be pretty easy to make based on that vs. any notion of one being “better” than another.

 

[toshu]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

Jon A

thanks for your points..all good ones.

One of my problems though, is that I do not have that much experience with scopes, and none, with good quality ones, let alone SFP vs FFP. I really need to look thru and analyze a bunch of different scopes to truly understand and appreciate the differences.

 

[Stubb]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nfoley</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am curious as to why so many SS 5-20HDs are being sold here recently. Seems like a couple are showing up every week here for sale. Not sure if guys bought them on the group buy with intent of selling and making a few bucks (which is fine), or many have bought them and not liked them.</div></div>

I suspect the former. The idea of buying an extra scope or two during the group buy to sell at a later date certainly crossed my mind. I ended up only buying the one I needed for a new rifle hand have happily shot it out to 1,000 yards.

—Andreas

 

[matt2143]

Re: NF or SWFA scope??

I had a NF and found it's glass to be lacking for the price, the features were definitely there. I found the IOR's to be excellent and the price used meant I could upgrade other scopes too. I purchased the SS to replace my IOR 3-18 (which replaced my NF). I do believe I prefer the IOR due to the field of view and the illumination differences. The SS glass is as good if not better then the IOR but the illumination is just plain strange to me. I think I would choose either the IOR or even the newer NF scopes. Sometimes you have to buy it to figure out if it is right for you. I am lucky the SS scopes seem to hold good value and hopefully I can get what it is worth back out of it.