Rifle Scopes Nightforce ATACR 5-25x56 F1 & ATACR 7-35x56 F1 Comparison

[Fire4EffectCA]

I am hearing online that the ATACR 7-35x56 F1 is better optically from 7-25x than the ATACR 5-25x56 F1 from 7-25x. I had planned to go with the 5-25x56 and I don’t think I have a need for power above 25x, but if there is an improvement optically I might consider it. Has anyone here been behind both scopes and has noticed any improvement?



Thanks.

 

[Aaron47pb]

https://www.snipershide.com/shooting/threads/nf-5-25-and-7-35-glass.6937447/#post-7667433

 

[hk dave]

It’s marginal. You have to study it to see the differences.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

It’s marginal. You have to study it to see the differences.

Dave,

Thanks. I have been going back and forth comparing the pros and cons of each scope. The Nightforce ATACR 5-25x56 F1 will fulfill my needs now, but will I regret it later. The ability to use the higher power in the 7-35x56 F1 for spotting is tempting, but I don’t like giving up the 120 MOA of internal elevation adjustment.

 

[hk dave]

The 7-35 has plenty of elevation. If I remember correctly on a 20moa base I think I had over 20+ Mils. They understate the actual elevation on paper.

 

[Niles Coyote]

Now the most important question, is the eye box truly more generous in the 5-25x when compared to the 7-35x while in the 7-25x power range???

 

[Ben17]

I have both and also have had a 4-16 ATACR. I think they are all great. The 25x is probably plenty of scope for most... well really for pretty much everything. I've shot 20x scopes out to 1800m with success.

I just picked up the 7-35 a few days ago only because of the deal I got on it. Also having some bias in the rail will help any internal elevation issues you may have but think you will have to be stretching it for it to be an issue. my 6.5cm elevation is 20 some mils at 1600.

I would ask yourself how often / where will you shoot that far. I don't know your situation or capabilities but I would take in account factors like the most common ranges you will shoot at. And ERA-TAC mount has adjustable bias I think by 10moa at a time not sure tho...

Both my ATACRs are tremor 3s. You could consider something like the h59 or tremor to combine Holding over and dialing for further distances.

As for glass as of now I can't tell the difference both seem clear to me. I will have some range time this weekend with them and will give you more feedback if you want it. I have the 35x on a 6dasher which is over kill but. The 25x is on a 6.5cm.

Also I shoot out to 1100yd regularly with my 25x and never had a complaint. In the heat mirage is an issue with any optic and a lot of the times I will be on 18x or so in high mirage. Also when I shoot PRS I rarely go above 20x

I haven't tested the 35x but the 25x tracks great.

Anyways food for thought. Feel free to ask any questions about them and I will do my best to help you with your choice.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

I have both and also have had a 4-16 ATACR. I think they are all great. The 25x is probably plenty of scope for most... well really for pretty much everything. I've shot 20x scopes out to 1800m with success.

I just picked up the 7-35 a few days ago only because of the deal I got on it. Also having some bias in the rail will help any internal elevation issues you may have but think you will have to be stretching it for it to be an issue. my 6.5cm elevation is 20 some mils at 1600.

I would ask yourself how often / where will you shoot that far. I don't know your situation or capabilities but I would take in account factors like the most common ranges you will shoot at. And ERA-TAC mount has adjustable bias I think by 10moa at a time not sure tho...

Both my ATACRs are tremor 3s. You could consider something like the h59 or tremor to combine Holding over and dialing for further distances.

As for glass as of now I can't tell the difference both seem clear to me. I will have some range time this weekend with them and will give you more feedback if you want it. I have the 35x on a 6dasher which is over kill but. The 25x is on a 6.5cm.

Also I shoot out to 1100yd regularly with my 25x and never had a complaint. In the heat mirage is an issue with any optic and a lot of the times I will be on 18x or so in high mirage. Also when I shoot PRS I rarely go above 20x

I haven't tested the 35x but the 25x tracks great.

Anyways food for thought. Feel free to ask any questions about them and I will do my best to help you with your choice.

Ben,

It sounds like 0 MOA rings will be fine for the NightForce 7-35x56 F1 shooting 6.5 CM at 1000 yards.

I never considered the 7-35x56 until a dealer here recently recommended it in place of the 5-25x56. He said the IQ was improved on the 7-35x56. I talked with the Nightforce factory and they were emphatic that the glass was identical.

I have owned two different NightForce NSX 5.5-22x56 scopes when I shot 50BMG down at Coalinga, CA. I bought the first one in 1997 and I sold both when I stopped shooting 50BMG in 2017. The pits at Coalinga are at 1,000 yards and I don’t plan on shooting beyond that for the time being. The NightForce 5-25x56 F1 or 7-35x56 F1 will be going on a LMT MWS in 6.5 CM upper. I currently have a NightForce 4-16x42 F1 on the LMT MWS in 308. I am looking at the MIL-XT reticle.

Thanks so much for your input.

 

[Ben17]

Ben,

It sounds like 0 MOA rings will be fine for the NightForce 7-35x56 F1 shooting 6.5 CM at 1000 yards.

I never considered the 7-35x56 until a dealer here recently recommended it in place of the 5-25x56. He said the IQ was improved on the 7-35x56. I talked with the Nightforce factory and they were emphatic that the glass was identical.

I have owned two different NightForce NSX 5.5-22x56 scopes when I shot 50BMG down at Coalinga, CA. I bought the first one in 1997 and I sold both when I stopped shooting 50BMG in 2017. The pits at Coalinga are at 1,000 yards and I don’t plan on shooting beyond that for the time being. The NightForce 5-25x56 F1 or 7-35x56 will be going on a LMT MWS in 6.5 CM upper. I currently have a NightForce 4-16x42 F1 on the LMT MWS in 308. I am looking at the MIL-XT reticle.

Thanks so much for your input.

Yea no problem. I love NF scopes! I bought one after I had one on my m110 which I put through the ringer overseas and it held up great and outperformed the leupolds by a long shot. After that I was sold and have bought them since. The MIL XT reticle looks good. I just love all the features of the T3 but that's what I was taught on so I am partial.

Anyways maybe (if I remember) I'll get some pics of it on the range this weekend other wise I can get some out my window or something. I always find it nice to see some pics. I'll get some down the glass the best I can. And of the two on the guns so you can see the size comparison of the two.

 

[CSTactical]

Ben,

It sounds like 0 MOA rings will be fine for the NightForce 7-35x56 F1 shooting 6.5 CM at 1000 yards.

I never considered the 7-35x56 until a dealer here recently recommended it in place of the 5-25x56. He said the IQ was improved on the 7-35x56. I talked with the Nightforce factory and they were emphatic that the glass was identical.

I have owned two different NightForce NSX 5.5-22x56 scopes when I shot 50BMG down at Coalinga, CA. I bought the first one in 1997 and I sold both when I stopped shooting 50BMG in 2017. The pits at Coalinga are at 1,000 yards and I don’t plan on shooting beyond that for the time being. The NightForce 5-25x56 F1 or 7-35x56 F1 will be going on a LMT MWS in 6.5 CM upper. I currently have a NightForce 4-16x42 F1 on the LMT MWS in 308. I am looking at the MIL-XT reticle.

Thanks so much for your input.

Both scopes use what they call ED glass (ED glass is a generic term and can come in different prescriptions set by the manufacturer ), but what I said to you is that they use a different optical system between those two scopes.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

Yea no problem. I love NF scopes! I bought one after I had one on my m110 which I put through the ringer overseas and it held up great and outperformed the leupolds by a long shot. After that I was sold and have bought them since. The MIL XT reticle looks good. I just love all the features of the T3 but that's what I was taught on so I am partial.

Anyways maybe (if I remember) I'll get some pics of it on the range this weekend other wise I can get some out my window or something. I always find it nice to see some pics. I'll get some down the glass the best I can. And of the two on the guns so you can see the size comparison of the two.

Ben,

Based on the spec sheet there is not a big difference in size and weight between the 5-25x56 F1 and 7-35x56 F1. It must look out of place on a 22LR build.

I just have to decide if the difference in price is justified for my needs. If you are paying MSRP the difference is $545.00 with my state sales tax. It sounds like the image IQ between the two is subjective.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

Both scopes use what they call ED glass (ED glass is a generic term and can come in different prescriptions set by the manufacturer ), but what I said to you is that they use a different optical system between those two scopes.

Hi Richard,

I understand that the prescription differences leads to difference in FOV and the parallax adjustment range, but I was trying to verify if there truly was a marked difference in IQ. If I could confirm that the IQ was superior on the 7-35x56 F1 at the powers I would be using my decision would be clear. I appreciate all the comments here. Everyone has been most helpful.

 

[physhphude]

In my experience: IQ is not significantly different. Parallax seems to be more forgiving on the 5-25. My vote is for the 5-25. The extra power over 25 does not seem to be useful in any situation I have encountered yet. I currently have the 7-35 an would trade it for the 5-25.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

In my experience: IQ is not significantly different. Parallax seems to be more forgiving on the 5-25. My vote is for the 5-25. The extra power over 25 does not seem to be useful in any situation I have encountered yet. I currently have the 7-35 an would trade it for the 5-25.

Thank you. This is helpful input.

 

[Mortalpawn]

I have the 7-35 with Mil-C and really like it. Obviously the eye box at 35x is tight due to the exit pupil being much smaller. Exit pupil of the device drops proportionally to the magnification since both scopes have the same objective diameter (56mm). However if you set both at 25x the exit pupil will be the same, and eye relief very similar.

Having shot this thing a lot in the field, I can think of very few situations where I would actually shoot a target at 35x. I would almost always dial it down below 20x to actually take a shot.

However there are at least three situations where the extra magnification matters. One is identifying a target. Hard to see, camouflaged and obscured targets are easier to positively identify at 35x. Another is for milling (measuring) a target. The Mil-C reticle has a inverted T on the lower right for milling and it is marked in 0.1 mil increments so you can do very precise milling of a target to range it.

The final reason to get 35x is for wind mirage. Mirage starts to show up well at around 20x depending on conditions, but the higher power of 35x will give you more mirage to work with even in dry climates if you defocus a bit. I always prefer to use mirage as it gives you an average of the wind over the path of the bullet and once you learn to read mirage it can be very accurate. So I often will dial up and defocus a bit to read the wind, then dial down and take the shot.

So yes, you almost never need to take a shot dialed up beyond 20x, but there are several uses for 35x prior to making the shot that make it worthwhile in my book.

 

[Ben17]

I just shot both this weekend and I agree 100% with Mortal pawn. I found myself checking wind and milling targets at 35 and shooting around 18-20x. Glass quality its a wash and the 35x seemed to track well but I didn’t tall target it. I got a first round hit at 740 on and 8in plate with it! I believe the 25 would have done the same but have 35x I could see the mirage where at 25x it was difficult to see at all.

 

[DoubleOught-BMA]

I've been on the fence between NF 7-35 ATACR and a Tangent Theta. I like the idea of extra mag (I like higher mag) and coming from a Razor Gen 2, I feel like either scope (NF or TT) would be a step-up optically that I would appreciate. Question is... with all of your dialing up to spot, dialing down to shoot... does the rotating ocular bother you? Seems like it would bug the hell out of me... but maybe it's one of those things you dont really notice?

 

[Ben17]

I've been on the fence between NF 7-35 ATACR and a Tangent Theta. I like the idea of extra mag (I like higher mag) and coming from a Razor Gen 2, I feel like either scope (NF or TT) would be a step-up optically that I would appreciate. Question is... with all of your dialing up to spot, dialing down to shoot... does the rotating ocular bother you? Seems like it would bug the hell out of me... but maybe it's one of those things you dont really notice?

I find it depends on the situation. In PRS comps I stay around 20x and I do my wind spotting through my spotting scope before I shoot and then if need be I’ll adjust of impacts. When I am shooting with friends and spotting through my scope or just shooting alone I zoom to read wind. The NF has a knob which makes it quick and easy. Otherwise buy a throw lever and you are all set. We pay a lot of money for this capability so I like to use it otherwise everyone would have fixed 25x and we all could save money because focal plane wouldn’t matter.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

I find it depends on the situation. In PRS comps I stay around 20x and I do my wind spotting through my spotting scope before I shoot and then if need be I’ll adjust of impacts. When I am shooting with friends and spotting through my scope or just shooting alone I zoom to read wind. The NF has a knob which makes it quick and easy. Otherwise buy a throw lever and you are all set. We pay a lot of money for this capability so I like to use it otherwise everyone would have fixed 25x and we all could save money because focal plane wouldn’t matter.

Ben,

Thanks again. Seeing the scopes side by side is helpful. I had the same thought as DoubleOught-BMA regarding the rotating ocular. I wonder if removing the ocular lens cap would make it less noticeable.

 

[dopedealer]

I have both, the 7X on a Gap 300 wm and the 5X on a 6.5x284 GAP. For hunting in the 700 and under range the 5x does all I want. I use my wm to hunt to but also shoot metal out to 2000 and I need the extra magnification.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

I just shot both this weekend and I agree 100% with Mortal pawn. I found myself checking wind and milling targets at 35 and shooting around 18-20x. Glass quality its a wash and the 35x seemed to track well but I didn’t tall target it. I got a first round hit at 740 on and 8in plate with it! I believe the 25 would have done the same but have 35x I could see the mirage where at 25x it was difficult to see at all.

Ben,

At an identical power, lets say 20 -25, does the reticle on the 5-25x56 appear to be the same size as on the 7-35x56?

 

[Ben17]

Ben,

At an identical power, lets say 20 -25, does the reticle on the 5-25x56 appear to be the same size as on the 7-35x56?

I believe the reticle is the same size for the tremor 3. I’m not sure if the other reticles are the same between the 25x and 35x. I know vortex viper pst reticles are different thickness between the powers. I would assume that the h59 and t3 are the same size but again don’t know about the mil c, moar, etc

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

I believe the reticle is the same size for the tremor 3. I’m not sure if the other reticles are the same between the 25x and 35x. I know vortex viper pst reticles are different thickness between the powers. I would assume that the h59 and t3 are the same size but again don’t know about the mil c, moar, etc

Ben,

Thanks. I just want to confirm that the reticle would be proportional at identical powers. Based on what you are saying at 25x the reticles on the 5-25x56 F1 and 7-35x56 F1 appear to be the same size. That would mean the reticle on the 7-35x56 F1 would appear larger at 35x than on the 5-25x56 F1 at 25x.

 

[Ben17]

Ben,

Thanks. I just want to confirm that the reticle would be proportional at identical powers. Based on what you are saying at 25x the reticles on the 5-25x56 F1 and 7-35x56 F1 appear to be the same size. That would mean the reticle on the 7-35x56 F1 would appear larger at 35x than on the 5-25x56 F1 at 25x.

Right the reticle appears larger on 35x but its 1st focal plane so it should.

Also here is from NF website.

for the mil xt line thickness

4-16x	.043 mils
5-25x	.033 mils
7-35x	.033 mils

ATACR™ 7-35x56 F1

If there is such a thing as a “professional” riflescope, it is an ATACR™. They are designed for military, law enforcement, and other tactical professionals…and for those who simply want to shoot like a professional. An ATACR™ riflescope is the combination of the finest materials, engineering...

www.nightforceoptics.com

The mil r and moar also vary between the powers but the mil c and tremor do not.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

Ben, thanks so much for your input.

I know what the reticle looks like (size wise) on the 5-25x56 F1 from 5x to 25x, but I don’t know what the reticle looks like (size wise) on the 7-35x56 F1 from 7x to 35x. I should have asked you does the reticle on the 7-35x56 F1 become to small to be useful on the lower end say 7-10x?

 

[Ben17]

I would say the full features of the Tremor 3 become useful around 10-12 power depending on your eyes, 16x for sure (I had a 4-16 before).

That being said for large targets that are close where wind is negligible, it works fine at 7x power as it is 5x. Other reticles may be different but for my eyes anything under 10-12 is a challenge to see and focus on all the sub-tensions of the tremor 3. I can make out the mil lines and the main crosshair but rest of the reticle can be straining.

 

[Fire4EffectCA]

I would say the full features of the Tremor 3 become useful around 10-12 power depending on your eyes, 16x for sure (I had a 4-16 before).

That being said for large targets that are close where wind is negligible, it works fine at 7x power as it is 5x. Other reticles may be different but for my eyes anything under 10-12 is a challenge to see and focus on all the sub-tensions of the tremor 3. I can make out the mil lines and the main crosshair but rest of the reticle can be straining.

Thanks again. That is the answer I was looking for. I should have phrased my question better the first time. I will place my order for the 7-35x56 F1 MIL-XT next week.

 

[DDT]

7-35 F1 with Mil-C reticle has 0.033mrad main lines. For me, it is perfect. Not too thin or thick, imho very well balanced.

 

[Mortalpawn]

I also have the Mil-C reticle and it is very clear and usable at 35x - particularly the inverted T on the lower right which can be used to very accurately measure and range small targets. I also like the center reticle dot as it gives you something definitive to focus on when shooting.

 

[amoihenri]

hi i want to know wich country is made this atacr 7-35*56 f1 and exactly made in wich country is write in scope ... its emergency question .tnx

 

[Ben17]

7-35 is made in japan the 5-25 i have is made in usa.

 

[TMR137]

hi i want to know wich country is made this atacr 7-35*56 f1 and exactly made in wich country is write in scope ... its emergency question .tnx

All NightForce scopes are “assembled” in the US. In terms of the internal parts they come from around the world. NF has used Japanese glass for as long as I can remember. As far as how it is “marked” those determinations are made by outside entities and it is based on a percentage of where the “parts” are manufactured not the actual assembly of the final product. The newer ATACR‘s will most likely be “labeled” as made in Japan.

 

[tarheel7734]

I am on the fence between the razor gen II and the atacr. With mill prices they are around 750.00 difference unless I want t3.