Rifle Scopes Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 - Initial Thoughts

#151
K3RRY said:
appreciate the heads up! I’ll check them out.
Click to expand...
Sure thing. Also, another came to mind in the under $2k market, I know literally nothing about them as they are newcomers and saw @koshkin had a post on his locals site recently, the company is Element and the scope is the Titan 5-25x56 and the specs say 15y minimum focus. Again, I know nothing about this scope other than it seems to be decent for the price, I'm not sure what budget you're in but that might be an option.

You mention with your NX8 that turrets and parallax are not 10/10, if you're looking for something along the lines of finding 10/10 especially for parallax, I would steer clear of 8x magnification FFP optics. The uber expensive Hensoldt 3.5-26x56 and Schmidt 3-27 (can focus to 10y) scopes are some of the few high magnification scopes that have figured out how to make a forgiving parallax, but that comes at a cost - quite literally as these are some of the most expensive scopes on the market. I think the March are a little more forgiving than the NX8 and I am just wrapping up some preliminary testing on a pre-production March 4.5-28x52 that is definitely more forgiving than previous March 8x models when it comes to parallax. Overall I think the March 4.5-28 will stir the pot a bit and offers an excellent design for dynamic PRS/NRL style events.

If you want one of the best close focusing scopes with regard to turrets, parallax, IQ then take a look at the scope that "started it all" - the Schmidt & Bender 5-25x56, it focusses down to 10 yards, has great turrets, forgiving parallax and outstanding IQ. About the only complaint on this scope is that it tunnels from around 5-7x and the reticle options aren't that great (though getting better with MSR2, GR2ID, and LRR-Mil if you like extremely thin reticles). But because these scopes have been around for a while you can often find some pretty good deals on them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: K3RRY
#152
wjm308 said:
Sure thing. Also, another came to mind in the under $2k market, I know literally nothing about them as they are newcomers and saw @koshkin had a post on his locals site recently, the company is Element and the scope is the Titan 5-25x56 and the specs say 15y minimum focus. Again, I know nothing about this scope other than it seems to be decent for the price, I'm not sure what budget you're in but that might be an option.

You mention with your NX8 that turrets and parallax are not 10/10, if you're looking for something along the lines of finding 10/10 especially for parallax, I would steer clear of 8x magnification FFP optics. The uber expensive Hensoldt 3.5-26x56 and Schmidt 3-27 (can focus to 10y) scopes are some of the few high magnification scopes that have figured out how to make a forgiving parallax, but that comes at a cost - quite literally as these are some of the most expensive scopes on the market. I think the March are a little more forgiving than the NX8 and I am just wrapping up some preliminary testing on a pre-production March 4.5-28x52 that is definitely more forgiving than previous March 8x models when it comes to parallax. Overall I think the March 4.5-28 will stir the pot a bit and offers an excellent design for dynamic PRS/NRL style events.

If you want one of the best close focusing scopes with regard to turrets, parallax, IQ then take a look at the scope that "started it all" - the Schmidt & Bender 5-25x56, it focusses down to 10 yards, has great turrets, forgiving parallax and outstanding IQ. About the only complaint on this scope is that it tunnels from around 5-7x and the reticle options aren't that great (though getting better with MSR2, GR2ID, and LRR-Mil if you like extremely thin reticles). But because these scopes have been around for a while you can often find some pretty good deals on them.
Click to expand...

Damn, that’s awesome info. I really appreciate this.

Regarding the Element Titan I went through two of them very recently and both had issues so I’m staying clear of them. However, haven’t tried their Nexus from Japan.

Yes, you’re right about 8x.

I’ll check out your recommendations. Thanks for the suggestions. Thumbs up man!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassaholic
#153
My pleasure, also good to know about the Element Titan, I really knew nothing about them but sounds like something to watch from the sidelines for now, a lot of these startups are hit and miss. We are always looking for the scopes that punch above their weight class, but in the optics world the rule "you get what you pay for" almost always rules the day. Scope companies who say their $500 scope compares with other manufacturer's $2000 scope are usually marketing hype. This is one of the reasons I enjoy the Hide so much, a lot of good real world experience (sure there's some bad blood but there always is, this is the internet after all ;))
 
  • Like
Reactions: K3RRY and Gleedus
#154
Birddog6424 said:
I shot all winter with a 30x XTR3. As well as hunting through November and December. I didnt have any cold weather issues.

For that matter I never had any issues with multitudes of XTR2s for the last five years or so. Nor saw anyone mention cold weather issues. Must have been something about yours. Different grease, or no grease used during production. Tough to say.

Sorry to hear you had an uncooperative one...
Click to expand...
It could be that it was the odd one out ive had that with other scopes already that the only reason i noticed something was wrong was because i had owned that model before and it was better.
I didnt notice much around freezing but -10 it started showing up -15 and colder was the problem it still worked but difficult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Birddog6424
#155
CRPS Shooter said:
It could be that it was the odd one out ive had that with other scopes already that the only reason i noticed something was wrong was because i had owned that model before and it was better.
I didnt notice much around freezing but -10 it started showing up -15 and colder was the problem it still worked but difficult.
Click to expand...

I had similar experiences with my PST II. My Razor gen II, no issues at all. Makes a guy wonder if it has to do with the manufacture being a little over zealous with the grease that day. Have a NX8 4-32 on my 223/coyote rifle now. Interested to see how it performs in the cold weather. I do like the scope so far, but I definitely don't have enough time behind it to have full confidence that it's the right choice so far. My buddy has a MK 5 that I'm hoping to be able to compare to this deer season. The Tikka needs something a little nicer and more durable than a PST II.
 
#157
As others have said, appreciate the work and sharing it with everyone. The NX8 was at the top of my list for a scope on an all-purpose bolt gun, but that finicky eyebox may have sqaushed that. Looking more like ATACR if I'm going to stay NF.
 
#158
Slevin182 said:
As others have said, appreciate the work and sharing it with everyone. The NX8 was at the top of my list for a scope on an all-purpose bolt gun, but that finicky eyebox may have sqaushed that. Looking more like ATACR if I'm going to stay NF.
Click to expand...

Shhhhh.... Just do it...

ZCOpic-2-420x167.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: bnaples and Slevin182
#159
Slevin182 said:
As others have said, appreciate the work and sharing it with everyone. The NX8 was at the top of my list for a scope on an all-purpose bolt gun, but that finicky eyebox may have sqaushed that. Looking more like ATACR if I'm going to stay NF.
Click to expand...
Overall the concept is great but the execution was lacking, not because NF couldn’t do it but they had a price point to meet. If this was a $3500 scope I have no doubt it’d be phenomenal but to meet $2k they had to cut too many corners IMHO. one of these days I’d like to check out the NX8 4-32, it is a longer scope with limited FOV so I expect it to do a lot better.
 
#160
wjm308 said:
one of these days I’d like to check out the NX8 4-32, it is a longer scope with limited FOV so I expect it to do a lot better.
Click to expand...

I fondled one last weekend at a local shop. I was fairly surprised that even while holding it by hand and looking through it at a wall 40ft away, I was able to turn the magnification all the way up and maintain the sight picture. You may be on to something.
 
#161
Would the NX8 2.5-20x50 with Mil XT be a good choice for a DMR style 6MM ARC build? Primary purpose would be banging steel out to 1200 yards and secondary purpose would be occasional deer and hog hunting. I am attracted to the lower weight and smaller size this scope offers...curious if you guys think it would be a good fit for my application. Thanks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: godofthunder
#162
I have an update that is worth talking about and updating my original review of this scope. I have now had the opportunity to review another NX8 2.5-20x50 scope and this "new" version does not exhibit any of the edge distortion that was prevalent in my original copy, in fact, the differences are so great I almost feel like NF changed their optical formula, it felt like two different scopes. This was either a QC issue that my early model had, or this is representative of some pretty significant sample variance. This would also explain why some NX8 2.5-20 users have declared their scopes to be similar to my original copy (significant edge distortion) while others have not had this issue as this latest NX8 displayed rather excellent edge to edge sharpness. Yes, the formula still applies - short scopes with high erectors are going to be more finicky with eyebox, DOF and parallax; however, based on my latest experience with the newer NX8 2.5-20 I have to admit that I am quite pleased.

The new NX8 2.5-20 will be featured in my upcoming review where I compared a S&B 3-27x56, a March 3-24x52 and the NX8 2.5-20, stay tuned...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Casbah, D_TROS, SD Carpenter and 8 others
#163
Glassaholic said:
I have an update that is worth talking about and updating my original review of this scope. I have now had the opportunity to review another NX8 2.5-20x50 scope and this "new" version does not exhibit any of the edge distortion that was prevalent in my original copy, in fact, the differences are so great I almost feel like NF changed their optical formula, it felt like two different scopes. This was either a QC issue that my early model had, or this is representative of some pretty significant sample variance. This would also explain why some NX8 2.5-20 users have declared their scopes to be similar to my original copy (significant edge distortion) while others have not had this issue as this latest NX8 displayed rather excellent edge to edge sharpness. Yes, the formula still applies - short scopes with high erectors are going to be more finicky with eyebox, DOF and parallax; however, based on my latest experience with the newer NX8 2.5-20 I have to admit that I am quite pleased.

The new NX8 2.5-20 will be featured in my upcoming review where I compared a S&B 3-27x56, a March 3-24x52 and the NX8 2.5-20, stay tuned...
Click to expand...

That's not the news I wanted to here, now I need to consider the NX8 again rather than going all in on the XTR3i.
If the optical formula has been dramatically imporved in the 2.5-20 how do you think it would compare to the 3.3-18?
 
#164
beetroot said:
That's not the news I wanted to here, now I need to consider the NX8 again rather than going all in on the XTR3i.
If the optical formula has been dramatically imporved in the 2.5-20 how do you think it would compare to the 3.3-18?
Click to expand...
That's the thing, I don't know if the optical formula was altered in any way, but what I can say is if I had my original scope and this new scope side by side I would have thought they were two different scopes. Was it QC? Is it sample variance? Was it a fluke? I have no idea, but if this latest NX8 is representative of the more recent NX8 scopes from NF, consider me impressed.

Hard to say as I don't have them side by side, I still think the XTR III is going to have slightly more forgiving eyebox, DOF and parallax simply in lieu of the design parameters, but optically, I'd have to say the NX8 has the edge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beetroot
#165
Thats funny you posted this. Ive got a 2.5-20 and have never really noticed the edge distrotion some complain about, maybe thats why. Parallex is a little finicky and its a little tougher to get behind than some longer optics but far from bad if used on a properly set up rifle. Life is a series of compromises and lower entry price and short design are two of them. For what it is ive always thought it was a very decent scope. Recently acquired a couple XTR3 3-18s for use om rimfire. I really like them except for stiff mag ring and parallex and no illumination. I think the nx8 has an edge in glass quality but the xtr3 is easier to get behind and i love the eyebox/fov and thats why im running them on coyote rifle and rimfire setup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Earnhardt, beetroot, D_TROS and 1 other person
#166
Millron said:
Thats funny you posted this. Ive got a 2.5-20 and have never really noticed the edge distrotion some complain about, maybe thats why. Parallex is a little finicky and its a little tougher to get behind than some longer optics but far from bad if used on a properly set up rifle. Life is a series of compromises and lower entry price and short design are two of them. For what it is ive always thought it was a very decent scope. Recently acquired a couple XTR3 3-18s for use om rimfire. I really like them except for stiff mag ring and parallex and no illumination. I think the nx8 has an edge in glass quality but the xtr3 is easier to get behind and i love the eyebox/fov and thats why im running them on coyote rifle and rimfire setup.
Click to expand...
It makes me wish I could get at least 2-3 copies of a scope for a review, but all my reviews are pro bono and I have to pay for the scopes out of my own pocket usually and since I'm not loaded and Biden's inflation is killing me, well it gets limiting. I would concur with your assessment on the NX8 and XTR III.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deersniper and Millron
#167
Have you noticed any variation in the NX8 4-32? I have three of them and they all seem identical to my eyes......but I'll preface that with I'm not that very picky with optics. Not sure my eyes are good enough to see subtle differences. Optically they are better than the 2.5-20s and better than the XTR III, but not ATACR level glass. I wish Nightforce would have stuck the 2.5-20 in that same Scope body as the 4-32 and made a 3-24 option in lieu of the 2.5-20 , in conjunction with a little bit bolder outer stadia on the FFP reticles. winner winner chicken dinner IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Earnhardt and Chasing3
#168
With so many complaints about the tight eye box, how does this scope compare to a Bushnell 3-12 or 4.5-18 LRTS/LRHS? I find those eyeboxes to be pretty picky but not necessarily a hindrance.
 
#173
Glassaholic said:
It makes me wish I could get at least 2-3 copies of a scope for a review, but all my reviews are pro bono and I have to pay for the scopes out of my own pocket usually and since I'm not loaded and Biden's inflation is killing me, well it gets limiting. I would concur with your assessment on the NX8 and XTR III.
Click to expand...
I bet if you asked ppl like me would send you scopes
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thorbeast
#180
Curious how the current 2.5-20 and 4-32 stack up?

I’m looking for a short scope for a switch barrel rifle. Everything from 308 to 338 LM so the wide mag range is really nice. Oh and I shoot at night too… my gut tells me the 2.5-20 version is what I’m after but the 4-32 seems to be more forgiving in the DOF / parallax department (which is very nice at night).

To benchmark, I have MK5’s in 5-25 and 3.6-18 at the moment and I like them both but the 5-25 is just too long. I don’t often crank to 25x but when I do I’m glad I have it (but on the other hand don’t miss it with the 3.6-18 haha)
 
#182
rlsmith1 said:
Curious how the current 2.5-20 and 4-32 stack up?

I’m looking for a short scope for a switch barrel rifle. Everything from 308 to 338 LM so the wide mag range is really nice. Oh and I shoot at night too… my gut tells me the 2.5-20 version is what I’m after but the 4-32 seems to be more forgiving in the DOF / parallax department (which is very nice at night).

To benchmark, I have MK5’s in 5-25 and 3.6-18 at the moment and I like them both but the 5-25 is just too long. I don’t often crank to 25x but when I do I’m glad I have it (but on the other hand don’t miss it with the 3.6-18 haha)
Click to expand...
I run 4 of the 2.5-20 F1 on ARs and 2 of the 4-32 F1 on bolt guns. The 2.5-20 is the best scope for a huge FOV. The 4-32 is a really nice setup for bolt actions. The parallax needs adjustment more on the top end of both models. When guys run the 2.5 up to 16x and the 4 up to 24x they are rarely bothered by this aspect. For stationary targets max power is fine. If shooting at night the 4-32 could benefit from a 56mm objective if going up to higher magnifications. I have the mk5 in 5-25 and it has a slight edge at night for light gathering with equal magnification around 20x. At around 16x they are basically the same. The light on the nightforce reticle is way better for my eyes though so that kind of makes it a draw. A couple nights ago I was able to still shoot clover size groups with a 4-32 set at 20x on white paper and a sharpie marker x with just moon light at 100 yards. The 2.5-20 does 0-500 yards really well, while the 4-32 is nice for 300-1000 yards. Both you can take out to a mile but scopes like the ATACR 7-35 are better for that application.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Earnhardt and rlsmith1
#185
rlsmith1 said:
What exactly didn’t you like on the bolt gun? The 2.5x low end is appealing for clip on use to me
Click to expand...

For some reason I had a really hard time getting behind that scope. That's even with the adjustable cheek piece and LOP on my Xylo chassis. I always felt like I was fighting that scope. I moved it numerous times trying to get the eye relief right without success. I'm no expert, but I've been shooting most of my life so IDK. I also found the 2.5x rather useless. It works better with the illumination on, but it's not daylight bright so it can really only be used in lowlight. I spend a lot of time behind my .22 so it was driving me crazy. No joy! It's going on an AR-15 and if I still hate it, it's going down the road. I've had the 432 for a day and I'm much happier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wildcats and rlsmith1
#186
sawman556 said:
For some reason I had a really hard time getting behind that scope. That's even with the adjustable cheek piece and LOP on my Xylo chassis. I always felt like I was fighting that scope. I moved it numerous times trying to get the eye relief right without success. I'm no expert, but I've been shooting most of my life so IDK. I also found the 2.5x rather useless. It works better with the illumination on, but it's not daylight bright so it can really only be used in lowlight. I spend a lot of time behind my .22 so it was driving me crazy. No joy! It's going on an AR-15 and if I still hate it, it's going down the road. I've had the 432 for a day and I'm much happier.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the input. I’ll have to find a shop that carries both and compare
 
#188
I have to say, I got behind the 2.5-20 for hours and really liked it. I was impressed. Didn't expect the eyebox to be as forgiving as it was. Certainly had to change parallax some but that was to be expected. If Leupold doesn't put the PR2 in the MK5 3.6-18. I think I might snag the 2.5-20 for the MK12. Mag range is certainly awesome for that gun.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bayoubigcat, Snapper314, Glassaholic and 1 other person
#189
J-Fonz said:
I have both the 2.5-20 (On a Cross) and the 4-32 (on a Proof MPA hunting rifle). The 4-32 is easier to get behind but by no means is the 2.5-20 difficult.
Click to expand...
What are your thoughts regarding the 4-32 on a Cross?

I am in the process of exploring possible upgrades to mine, which currently has a Burris Eliminator IV. I use it for hunting in South Carolina and New England. My barrel is being upgraded to a 20" 308 from Straight Jacket Armory because I was not happy with groups out of the stock 16" when using heavier rounds.
 
#190
Greg M said:
What are your thoughts regarding the 4-32 on a Cross?

I am in the process of exploring possible upgrades to mine, which currently has a Burris Eliminator IV. I use it for hunting in South Carolina and New England. My barrel is being upgraded to a 20" 308 from Straight Jacket Armory because I was not happy with groups out of the stock 16" when using heavier rounds.
Click to expand...
Don’t see why it wouldn’t work and work well.
 
#191
I sent quite a few rounds downrange breaking in my 22creed. Has a nx8 2.5-20 milXt on it. This is a newer production from last summer. I quite like it to be honest. Yes parallax requires tuning once you change distance or magnification, but it's very simple, once image goes crisp/sharp, parallax is gone. My 4-32 is same way. Unlike some scopes there's a large range where image is sharp, but to be parallax free, you have to fine tune.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BurtG and rlsmith1
#192
I have the 2.5-20 and 4-32. I also have an ATACR. I use them for different purposes and all are nice glass to shoot behind. The ATACR is heavy so I don't use that on any lightweight rifles. I use the NX8s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Heston McBride
Scope / Mount Combo - NX8 2.5-20x50 or ??
Replies
4
Views
401
al22300
A
FAFOFJB
WTB WTB Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 F1 MOAR FDE
Replies
1
Views
74
SeanP
SeanP
Buttersdad
SOLD Nightforce FDE NX8 2.5-20x50 Mil-XT & ADM scope mount
Replies
3
Views
796
dynadog44
D
toshu
Rifle Scopes Nightforce NX8 - 4-32x50mm
Replies
3
Views
302
toshu
toshu
Cody Caddock
SOLD Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 F1 Mil-C C623 $1500
Replies
1
Views
162
Cody Caddock
Cody Caddock
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts