Rifle Scopes Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 - Initial Thoughts

I have the NX8. I needed a quality scope for my Vudoo V22. I chose it because I wanted a .2 mil reticle, paralax free shoting at 25yards, under 2 grand, and I needed it in a small package. This scope fit the bill. Depth of field is a bit fussy but once you label your paralax adjustment everything comes together. I was really impressed with the scope. I found eye box more forgiving than the SB short so I was pumped and delighted with this scope.
20200213_213331.jpg20200213_212904.jpg
 
I found eye box more forgiving than the SB short so I was pumped and delighted with this scope.
Makes me wonder if there are some QC issues, as this definitely wasn't the case for me, the NX8 had the worst eyebox I've experienced in a scope since the Sig Tango 4 4-16. Pondering picking up another NX8 at some point to see if it's any different.
 
Backstory

When the Nightforce NX8 long range scopes were announced I raised an eyebrow. Over the years I’ve had or used many different long-range scopes from the budget category all the way into alpha class, but in all that time I have never owned a Nightforce and the reason is because they never made a scope that appealed to me. The ATACR F1 series was the first that really drew my attention, but the 5-25 is a hefty beast and has poor FOV performance at the low end. The 4-16x42 drew my attention but I rarely opt for scopes with objectives smaller than 50mm because most of my scopes get used in low light situations. I realize they recently came out with the F1 4-16x50 but this only happened after other manufacturers were already offering 3x/4x – 18x/20x and I prefer having more than 16x at the top end, if Nightforce had an ATACR F1 4-20x50 I’d be all over that. I think it's safe to say that nobody was expecting Nightforce to come out with this NX8 long range line and offer a 2.5-20 and 4-32 scope and certainly nobody was expecting these scopes to come in at the $2k price point. The Nightforce NX8 is using an 8x erector design in a short body similar to the March F series scopes. I’ve owned two of the March scopes in the past and their lackluster FML-1 reticle and finicky depth and parallax have always had me wanting more even though they impressed optically. So, the question that has been on my mind has been – where did NF compromise in order to build an 8x erector scope in a short body and sell it for $2k. I am already familiar with the compromises that March had to make with their design, but the March scopes also cost more than $3k if you want illumination. For the most part, online reviews of the NX8 have been nothing short of praising this scope for all it offers with no glaring compromises and I realized that in order to find out for myself I would have to purchase the scope and put it through some initial testing.

Build Quality and Ergo

The NX8 appears to have excellent build quality – without putting the scope through the wringer like underwater, freezing, etc. just the overall look and feel of the scope is well done. All finishes are nice and well executed. Some may balk at the 30mm tube but NF engineers were able to squeeze 32 mil of elevation which is more than some 34mm designs. However, it’s not all roses as the design of the NX8 pushes the turret housing forward which means there is very little room for a ring or mount between the turret housing and the front objective bell, this may make it more difficult on some rifle platforms to mount in the correct location. Nightforce also opted not to use a fast focus diopter which means there is lots of turning of the diopter to get it right (more on this later), but they did make the diopter locking which is a nice feature and I’ve also read the ATACR series suffers from a moving ocular when you adjust magnification which would definitely annoy me since I like to use caps. Speaking of caps, another nice feature in a $2k scope is the NX8 comes with NF branded Tenebraex caps, a very nice accessory to be included.

View attachment 7136417

Turrets

Being my first Nightforce scope I did not know what to expect but based on rave reviews from other owners online I had the expectation that NF scopes excel optically and mechanically. My first experience with the turrets was a bit underwhelming to be honest. Compared to Minox ZP5, Kahles, Schmidt, Leupold Mark 5 and others, the NX8 turrets don’t have the snap I was expecting. Where other turrets have a distinct click or clunk between each .1 mil mark, the NX8 has a more muted sound and oddly enough, the windage turret has that more distinct click that I wish the elevation turret had. With most other scopes it’s the other way around, usually the elevation turret feels the best and the windage is lacking. But, “man does not live on clicks alone”, and while muted the NX8 turrets are precise with very little play and easy to dial elevation, in the end I do not think I would have a problem accurately dialing and the spacing of the 10 mil per rev turret is nicer compared to the tight spacing of the 15 mil per turn and greater variety found in other scopes. The windage is capped which is a very nice feature for those who don’t tend to dial wind and don’t want that turret getting bumped while moving around in the field.

View attachment 7136423

View attachment 7136418

Reticle and Illumination

For the longest time Nightforce was stuck in the SFP market but had great BDC style reticles, it took them a while to get into FFP and then it took even longer for them to get a decent .2 mil hash reticle with the Mil-C and then finally last year with the Mil-XT Christmas tree version. The scope I purchased has the Mil-C reticle and I have to say, I like it better than the SKMR with regard to thickness, the SKMR is pretty thin and sometimes difficult to pick out in shadows or high contrast backgrounds, but the Mil-C seems to be a tad thicker and easier to discern in those conditions. What I don’t like with the Mil-C is the size of the .2 hash marks, they are quite tall and even though they alternate (.2 and .8 on bottom while .4 and .6 are on top) I still find them a bit distracting (again, personal preference). I knew the NX8 had Digillum illumination, but not owning a NF previously I spent quite some time trying to figure out how on earth do you turn on and set illumination until by accident I pressed the middle of the parallax/side focus and realized there is a button that depresses – that is a slick feature; however, unlike a dial control, it is somewhat of a pain to switch between different brightness levels as you have to click in each time to adjust and it only goes to the next brightest setting until you get to max or minimum and it flashes several times and then it starts to get brighter (or dimmer) in which each successive click, but hold the button for about 5 seconds and it switches from red to green illumination. I’m not sure which I like better, the red still seems brighter and more pronounced but I’d want a lot more time with it in different light levels to make a determination, what I do like is the fact that you have the option. I did compare daylight bright to my Kahles K318i which has the brightest illumination I’ve seen to date, and the NF kept right up with it, very usable daylight illumination.

Image Quality (IQ)

I’m going to break down IQ into four categories – Contrast, Resolution, Color and CA

Contrast
The NX8 shows really good contrast when your eye is in center. The NX8 appears to be on par with the K318i within its sweet spot.​

Resolution
Without spending extended time with my resolution charts it would be difficult to discern just how well the NF Nx8 2.5-20x50 performs compared to the alpha class optics; however, initial impressions are very high and in some situations seems to be on par if not slightly better than the K318i. However, while the resolution was impressive the NX8 shows pretty significant image distortion if your eye is not perfectly centered. This is compounded at close ranges under 100 yards and seems to be more forgiving the further out you go; in this regard, the K318i definitely excels as very little distortion is noticeable and edge to edge sharpness is maintained throughout the majority of the zoom range.​
Color
Color fidelity seems to be managed very well, colors looked true to life. There was not an overly warm or overly cool cast to the image. I prefer an image that is neutral to warm and the NX8 seems to deliver for what my eyes like to see. Compared to the Kahles the color seemed very comparable.​
CA
This is one area where I thought the NX8 was really going to struggle, but it was very difficult for me to induce any strong CA even in my test target with white on black, the NX8 handled CA exceedingly well. Compared to the Kahles, CA controlled appeared to be on par if not slightly better in some situations which is very impressive indeed as the K318i controls CA very well and only bested by the ZCO ZC420 in the ultra short category.​
DISCLAIMER: DO NOT USE THE BELOW IMAGE TO JUDGE IQ, THE NX8 PERFORMED MUCH BETTER THAN THROUGH THE SCOPE IMAGES CAN CAPTURE.​


Glass

Outside of the above issues with the edges, the glass is superb, Nightforce offers very little information on the optical design or glass used in the NX8; however, this article from Guns & Ammo - https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/nx8-nightforce-scopes-review/364247 indicates that NF is using ED glass in the NX8 and uses additional glass elements in the 2.5-20 design to help correct for aberrations in the ultra short design.

Eyebox

As expected, the eyebox on the NX8 is very finicky, you have to have your eye placed just right for a clear sight picture, the Kahles K318i, ZCO ZC420 and Schmidt Ultra Short 3-20 are much more forgiving in this regard (but they are all quite a bit more expensive). Proper scope mounting techniques and proper cheekweld is going to eliminate much of this effect, but it is still there and may pose an issue for some especially if they find themselves shooting from odd positions where it’s difficult to get your eye perfectly centered.

Depth/DOF

The March scopes I had struggled with Depth Of Field (DOF) and this was one area where I thought the NX8 might struggle as well, and I was right. You do not get the same level of depth forgiveness with the NX8 as you do with other scopes at this price point and higher. The NX8 is not horrible, but you will find yourself having to tweak the side focus a bit more in order get objects near and far in proper focus. Compared to the Kahles, I was having to make more adjustments to focus whereas the K318i/ZCO/Schmidt was much more forgiving with almost a “near, middle and far” behavior.

Parallax

Similar to DOF, parallax seems to follow the same protocol. The NX8 was much more finicky with parallax and has to be set just right with minute adjustments to get the reticle to be parallax free with the image. The NX8 can focus from 11 yds to infinity and therefore has a very long focus adjustment range which further compounds getting the parallax just right. Initially I thought I could not get a parallax free image at magnifications below 16x as I saw the reticle moving all over the place with slight eye displacement; however, after fiddling with the diopter a bit more and fine tuning of the side focus/parallax I was able to tame it down some, but still noticed movement until I realized the whole image was moving, so the scope was parallax free but because of the distortion and finicky eyebox, anything but dead center eye placement caused the image to warp around like a fun house curved mirror at a carnival. All scopes show some of this distortion especially at lower magnifications; however, the NX8 shows a significant amount of this and is probably the most unforgiving aspect of this scope. In contrast, the Kahles image seemed rock solid along with the reticle with little to no discernable distortion until you get into very low magnification ranges.

View attachment 7136451

Conclusion

Putting an 8x erector into a short body has its limitations and NF engineers were not able to overcome those limitations (at least for the price point they are selling at). The narrow depth of field and heavy edge distortion of the image especially at lower magnifications along with the finicky parallax has me still wanting for more from the NX8. While I like the Mil-C reticle mag range and illumination, there are just too many other drawbacks for me with the NX8 personally. It’s too bad because I really wanted this scope to exceed my expectations and while it has in some areas, it has not in others. I am sure there will be plenty of shooters who are not bothered by these shortcomings and will be quite pleased with this scope.

Other $2k class scopes I have used would be the Leupold Mark 5HD 3.6-18x44 which had much better turrets and DOF/Parallax; however, my copy did not do that great in overall IQ and the sweet spot of the NF NX8 was quite a bit better than the Leupold. I've had the Steiner T5Xi's and their CA was so bad they were immediately returned. The Bushnell LRTS 4.5-18x44 and Tract Toric 4-20x50 are lower priced but suffer from heavy CA; however, the do have impressive IQ for the price. At a little higher price point the Vortex AMG 6-24x50 is a better all around scope (overall IQ, turrets). But none of these scopes offer an 8x erector inside a short body, so in reality Nightforce has no competition from any scope at this price point.

I realize there are many who will not “see” the same issues that I see and will claim their version has no edge distortion or is not finicky with DOF or parallax, etc., I am simply pointing out issues that I see based on my experience with lesser and better optics. There are compromises with most every optic and we all have personal preferences when it comes to some of these features. I think for many, the Nightforce NX8 2.5-20x50 will be a favorite, it certainly fills a niche we have not seen before at this price, kudos to NF for being bold enough to bring something like this to market.

EDIT: I wanted to give the Nightforce NX8 a "second chance" and decided to spend a lot more time with it. While the edge distortion is there, it is not nearly as prominent when you get a proper cheekweld, the eyebox is still very tight but as long as you can be in good alignment, you may not notice much distortion when transitioning to different targets. I think dynamic shooters (like PRS and NRL style) and those who find themselves in awkward shooting positions will still struggle with this scope, those who do not find themselves in these situations often may not have as much an issue. The finicky parallax is still there but again, it is tamed with proper scope mounting and consistent cheekweld.

View attachment 7136416
Fantastic write up!
 
"it is tamed with proper scope mounting and consistent cheekweld."

This I can confirm. I have 1,000 rounds downrange with the scope on my rifle. If I was running around with it in some kind of dynamic situation, I'm sure I would appreciate a scope with a more forgiving eye relief and eye box, but....the shooting I do is rather stationary and so far, I'm very quickly and easily able to move across about a 75 yards field of steel at various distances, out to 400, with no problem whatsoever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CSTactical
@wjm308

I have read your reveiw of this and bushnell dmr2. I am currios if you think the nightforce is worth the extra money over the dmr2 illuminated. I am currios of what you think because you you seem to value many of the same features i do.

If the xtr3 illuminated was available i think that would be the middle ground i am after but as of now i am really torn between these 2.

Bushnell.
Nearly half the cost
Proven turrets and tracking
Usable but maybe not same level IQ
Usable but not a great reticle

Nightforce
Better reticle
Lighter
Nightforce quality
I am concerned about the eye box and DOF

Thanks
 
@wjm308

I have read your reveiw of this and bushnell dmr2. I am currios if you think the nightforce is worth the extra money over the dmr2 illuminated. I am currios of what you think because you you seem to value many of the same features i do.

If the xtr3 illuminated was available i think that would be the middle ground i am after but as of now i am really torn between these 2.

Bushnell.
Nearly half the cost
Proven turrets and tracking
Usable but maybe not same level IQ
Usable but not a great reticle

Nightforce
Better reticle
Lighter
Nightforce quality
I am concerned about the eye box and DOF

Thanks
Your very last sentence above are some of the biggest detriments to the NX8 2.5-20 IMHO, so if those are the things you're concerned about I think you would like the Bushnell a bit better. While the Bushnell has a narrow FOV, the edge distortion with the NX8 obscures the edge clarity on the NX8. The Bushnell ET DMR II is a great scope for the price. NF NX8 has a better reticle, better illumination, better center resolution, better CA and is lighter than the Bushnell - it is also going to have better resale value unless you can find a killer deal on the DMR II. A lot of owners do not seem bothered by the shortcomings of the NX8 2.5-20 design, not sure if it's justification of the NF brand or they simply don't shoot in situations that would put those shortcomings to the test. You might be one of those shooters so the NF might be worth a try for you. Not sure how much I've helped, I could go either way between these two scopes, but if you're looking to save some money I do not think the DMR II will let you down. One final thought, the DMR II can only focus to 75y while the NX8 is 11y, so if you think you'll be shooting close range there is a clear winner in the NX8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Birddog6424
Your very last sentence above are some of the biggest detriments to the NX8 2.5-20 IMHO, so if those are the things you're concerned about I think you would like the Bushnell a bit better. While the Bushnell has a narrow FOV, the edge distortion with the NX8 obscures the edge clarity on the NX8. The Bushnell ET DMR II is a great scope for the price. NF NX8 has a better reticle, better illumination, better center resolution, better CA and is lighter than the Bushnell - it is also going to have better resale value unless you can find a killer deal on the DMR II. A lot of owners do not seem bothered by the shortcomings of the NX8 2.5-20 design, not sure if it's justification of the NF brand or they simply don't shoot in situations that would put those shortcomings to the test. You might be one of those shooters so the NF might be worth a try for you. Not sure how much I've helped, I could go either way between these two scopes, but if you're looking to save some money I do not think the DMR II will let you down. One final thought, the DMR II can only focus to 75y while the NX8 is 11y, so if you think you'll be shooting close range there is a clear winner in the NX8.


Thanks.

I have been thinking dmr 2for a while but kind of thinking buy once cry once. I just dont want to be disappointed in a 2k optic. In all honesty i dont know if i could see a difference. My current optic is a gen 1 pst so anything is a huge improvement.
 
Thanks.

I have been thinking dmr 2for a while but kind of thinking buy once cry once. I just dont want to be disappointed in a 2k optic. In all honesty i dont know if i could see a difference. My current optic is a gen 1 pst so anything is a huge improvement.
My personal opinion, the Nightforce ATACR series is more along the lines of "buy once, cry once" rather than the NX8. The ATACR series is better overall, better glass, better turrets and possibly better build quality. With optics, by and large, you get what you pay for so when you see a 4x erector ATACR 4-16 selling for around the same price as an 8x erector NX8 you have to ask, what compromises did they make with the design to meet that price point. Don't get me wrong, even with the compromises they made I think the NX8 is pretty impressive for the price point and everything it offers. But I have come to appreciate scope designs that are more forgiving than what the NX8 offers, again, my personal preference, YMMV.
 
I have a the NX8 2 -20.
The relative short depth of field is it's only setback IMO. And, to be honest, I believe it keeps you shooting parallax free because you notice your target will be blurry if not set correctly. Lots of scopes have plenty of depth of field and they look great at all distances all the time...but that doesn't make it parallax free and opens you up for error.

This scope is perfect for NRL 22 style matches...might not want o go hunt w it, but I can shoot peanuts at 100 yards and measure my splashes and POI with a .1mil in my reticle.

I'm shooting the best I can possibly shoot w my scope. Find me another .2 mil reticle for $1,700 that are parallax free at 25 yards in this size package...with tracking history of a NF and I'm all ears.

For my application, this was the best compact scope under 2G for my vudoo V-22.
 
Thanks, I like the Leupold brand more, but I like the Nightforce MOAR reticle more. My barrel and stock are four months out, so I have time. I hope you can get yours soon!
 
I had this scope on my final list but in the end didn’t think it was the right optic. I was looking for a good FFP, scope with illumination and zero stop that can focus down to 10yds. My application is a PCP air rifle, most hunting situations are 5-25yds and for target I can stretch it out as far as I please. In the end I went with the Element Optics Nexus. It’s a new company and the Nexus is a 5-20x50 scope in the $1500 price range. Scope is very nice for the money and I think it’s in striking range of the Kahles scopes for optical quality (I never had CA issues with my 312 or 624) and mechanics (turrets). I posted my initial impressions of the scope in the scope forum.
 
Bumping again to see if there are any of the F2 models out in the wild yet? Really on the fence about ordering one, but lack of reviews so far have me hesitant.

F2 users don't strike me as the kind that want to hang out on the Hide. A review is bound to crop up eventually.
 
The NX8 4-32x50 F1 T3 is what I have and love it. It is like the mini ATACR for me. It is definitely better than the SHV. Yes sure people say it is less than an ATACR. My eyes can discern any difference. AT 32X the eye box is the same as the ATACR 7-35 at 35X. The parallax is a little bit more sensitive. I can however get focused without parallax quick as well. It is lighter, more compact. Is clarity less than the ATACR? For some maybe. For what the ATACR has does not warrant the price difference if there is difference in clarity. I love it. Glad NF made it. If I can hit the same target with an ATACR vs NX8, then I will take the NX8. I really don't need the added little bit of improvement I may (if any) get from the ATACR.
 
@Birddog6424...........WE GET IT!!!! U like Burris. Aren't you also sponsored by them? So I for one am gonna take what you say with a Grain of Salt. It doesn't mean your opinion has no value, but its also shaded by the cloud of some type of incentive to push Burris.

I have no doubt the XTR3 is a nice scope but every time somebody post about a specific optic, especially Nightforce, you jump on the thread pimping the XTR3. Optics designers at Burris chose to stay with a Tighter magnification range. Nightforce went the other direction and went with an 8x zoom range in compact package for <2K, FFP, and sub 30 OZ. That design is probably going to have some optical limitations at the extremes on the low and high end, and some teething pains. I don't think the NX8 is the best scope out there for guys shooting PRS, at least thats not where it excels....But there is a hell of a lot of other applications for scopes outside of that specific shooting discipline that it works pretty well for.

Personally, I like Burris optics, I've had several that were great optics. Also have had several TURDS in their lower mid tier stuff. I used to really like the Full fields for inexpensive "hunting" glass....... Any of them made in the last few years not so much. Really miss the old Black Diamonds. I thought they were a great american made Leupold alternative back in the day. Also had an XTR 2 for about 5 minutes. Glass was like looking thru a milk jug. It felt well made but I couldn't get by the crappy glass.
 
...the Burris XTR3 is a kick ass scope, it still gets overlooked here on the Hide.
I really like the Burris XTR III 5.5-30x56 but the SCR 2 Mil is not illuminated. I reached out inquiring if/when an illuminated version would be available. They said some time in 2021. Unfortunately, I couldn't wait and purchased an NX8. Had the Burris been illuminated it would have been a really tough choice.
 
I’ll be jumping on the illumination version but honestly I hope they don’t make the inner portion of the reticle too thick. If they do then I may just go back to this non-illumination model.
 
They definitely have a vision in their head of what they want this scope to be, and they're willing to invest the time it takes to get it right. They aren't rushing this to market.

The fact that the competition version is doing so well for them has made that decision a little easier I suspect. I've been in line for a new 30x for almost 3 months now. Everything is allocated.

I'm hoping we see the illuminated version at SHOT.
I would like to see it introduced at shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Birddog6424
I doubt "too thick" is in the works. I believe it will be the thickness of the SCR in the XTRII. That reticle illuminates well. I never heard anyone call it either too thick or too thin.

Do you know what the actual subtensions of the SCR and SCR2 are in both the XTR3 models?

There are pictures on the Burris website but they are a bit of mess with some referencing the XTR 2 and others the XTR3.
 
Here's the SCR2 page.


And here's the SCR.


Both in Mil.. . Its an awfully subtle distinction. Most of the main lines are .03" thickness on the SCR2. And .035 on the SCR. And as mentioned, I've never heard anyone complain about the line being too thick or thin on the SCR. I guess that .005 is just enough to make it more versatile.

The SCR page doesn't list either of the XTR3 models. Are they both models the same subtensions as the 4-20/5-25?

It was said in a previous thread that the SCR2 reticle is slightly thicker in the 3.3-18 model but the SCR2 page only shows the one drawing.
 
You stopped making sense to everyone around these parts a few posts back...

About as much sense as buying a Burris over much more superior scopes that can be had at the same or less cost.

My uncle bought a eliminator for god who knows what reason other than shits and giggles, sold it and bought a vortex. Biggest piece of shit scope ever he said.
 
Who is shooting their Nightforce NX8's in NRL22? How has the scope been when shooting off of barricades and other positions?

NX8 4-32x50 Mil-C (its illuminated too) focuses unbelievably close. I've read this thread and have not noticed any of the quibbles others may or may not have had with the NX8 2.5-20 Tank traps, barrels, ladders concrete blocks no problems. Great glass!
 
  • Like
Reactions: gamewarden
About as much sense as buying a Burris over much more superior scopes that can be had at the same or less cost.

I probably shouldn’t encourage you based on the nature of your previous posts but I’m curious - With regard to the XTR III - name the scope that is “much more superior” that can be had for “same or less cost”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Birddog6424
I probably shouldn’t encourage you based on the nature of your previous posts but I’m curious - With regard to the XTR III - name the scope that is “much more superior” that can be had for “same or less cost”.

$1685 for my shiny new NX8s or a Vortex G2 can be had for $1700. Both of which have a better resale value aswell.

Dont be mad I shit on a constant burris shill or probably your buddy.
 
Last edited:
Like I said, stop taking this so personal. You obviously know nothing about Burris optics, regardless of some obscure buddy analogy about one bad scope. You obviously haven't owned one, or seen an XTR3. Let alone compared it to a comparably priced optic. You have zero experience with Burris, you're just getting all bunjed up over nothing.


Maybe you should add to the forum more other than just shill for Burris. That is my issue here. You add nothing to any conversation other than preach Burris considering you are also sponsored by them.
 
$1685 for my shiny new NX8s or a Vortex G2 can be had for $1700. Both of which have a better resale value aswell.

Dont be mad I shit on a constant burris shill.

Not mad, but if you think and NX8 2.5-20 is close to the XTR III 3.3-18 with regard to optical/mechanical quality well I might say you’re either delusional or extremely biased. XTR III has better turrets (more tactile, but this personal preference) and better glass (edge to edge sharpness). I do like the illumination and Mil-XT reticle on the NF but outside of that the finickyness of the parallax and shallow DOF along with the other issues puts the NF NX8 Into a lower category for me. The Razor G2 is like a Clydesdale compared to a quarterhorse, it’s a 3lb beast that gets the job done and done well but not everyone wants a 3lb beast on their rifle.
 
Maybe you should add to the forum more other than just shill for Burris. That is my issue here. You add nothing to any conversation other than preach Burris considering you are also sponsored by them.
Birddog has been around this forum for a very long time, yes he’s sponsored by Burris and is often promoting their products but he is very active in helping the community, you apparently haven’t been around long enough to know this and I do understand some of your frustration but there’s a better way to go about getting your point across than name calling.
 
Not mad, but if you think and NX8 2.5-20 is close to the XTR III 3.3-18 with regard to optical/mechanical quality well I might say you’re either delusional or extremely biased. XTR III has better turrets (more tactile, but this personal preference) and better glass (edge to edge sharpness). I do like the illumination and Mil-XT reticle on the NF but outside of that the finickyness of the parallax and shallow DOF along with the other issues puts the NF NX8 Into a lower category for me. The Razor G2 is like a Clydesdale compared to a quarterhorse, it’s a 3lb beast that gets the job done and done well but not everyone wants a 3lb beast on their rifle.

Maybe you are biased as well.

Lemme know how easy it is to get a NX8, lead times are 2-4 months. You can buy a burris now. Money talks and nobody wants a burris. Not to mention you can get a Leupold Mark 5 as well for the same price sometimes. Your biased completely for burris. In addition to the vendors mentioned, there are many more options besides those. You hold the Burris the best of the best. Ill take a Leupold or NF before a Burris that I will have to send in to get fixed once a year and deal with shit CS from what i have gathered through the years . They are tanks and Burris has been hit or miss on quality and nobody wants to waste their money on scopes or vendors who have not proven their company or scope.

Apparently, you dont get my drift either while still preaching the godsend of burris. You and birdshit are burris salesman more than users.
 
Last edited:
Thats terribly inaccurate.. I post quite a bit on this forum that has nothing to do with Burris optics. I compete in PRS and 3 Gun, and post in the bolt rifle and semi-auto section all the time. I reload for a bunch of different calibers, and post a lot in the reloaders section.

I'm an MD of a national PRS match sponsored by Burris Optics (had to toss that in there because I'm a schill ;) ) and was the Match Director this year for the Rocky Mountain NW PRS Regional Series championship match, so I also post regularly in the competitive sections. Honestly, I'm all over the place.

I post here about scopes. This is the scope section, and I recommend Burris where I think appropriate. At times, ad nauseum. If i don't think it appropriate, I dont say anything. I dont interject on scopes I have no experience with. Many long time members are used to me, realize by now I'm harmless, and apply appropriate value to my posts knowing im a sponsored shooter.

Its pretty easy to just live and let live around here. For most people. You don't seem to manage it. Quite frankly, you've reached a point where you simply talking out of your ass and have no firsthand experience whatsoever. You've taken it upon yourself to feel insulted that people far more experienced and knowledgeable than yourself dare to malign your beloved brand. Your posts have descended into the idiotic. So you do you..

I dont have a beloved brand, but you sure do. Quite a bad salesman too.
 
I bought the NX8 4x32 for my AR platform 6.5CM, looking forward to trying it out. I will only be shooting out to 800-1000yds max so hopefully it will be a good match for my rifle.
The NX8 4-32 is a longer scope and doesn't appear to suffer from some of the shortcomings of the 2.5-20, I've heard good things about the 4-32 but do not have personal experience. Let us know your thoughts once you get it and have some time to set it up.
 
I bought a xtr ii 5-25 with the SCR a couple of years ago for the shits and giggles just because i like trying optics out. I was unimpressed with the glass as it was simular to the PST gen 1 line. But i really liked the reticle. I prefer a thicker reticle and tend to run low mag for field of view. My biggest complaint was in cold weather the turrets etc. Would all but seize and it was difficult to dial in cold weather. I typical shoot more in the winter as its off season so i sold it. I should note the vortex are almost as bad on the mag ring and parallax but you can still dial. I mostly use IOR now as it fits what i like best and works well in the cold. I have a Minox on the way we shall see how it fares.
The Burris XTR iii interests me because of the large field of view. has anyone used it in the cold and how are the controls? I realize that all scopes are going to be affected by cold just some more then others.
 
I just picked up a NX8 4-32x50 and it appears that the 2.5-20x50 is very similar. I was underwhelmed at first like the op but the major caveats are the eye box and turrets imo, but these small trade offs pay off for it in size, minimum focus distance, glass, zero stop design and electronics. It just depends on what you’re looking for and need in a scope. I haven’t tried the ATACR 7-35 and that’s next on my list.

Anyone have other great recommendations for a scope with a minimum parallax of <15 yards or less? This is my main feature requirement at the moment.
 
The NX8 4-32 is a longer scope and doesn't appear to suffer from some of the shortcomings of the 2.5-20, I've heard good things about the 4-32 but do not have personal experience. Let us know your thoughts once you get it and have some time to set it up.

I have the 4-32 and the eye box, turrets and parallax are not 10/10 but those are my only gripes. Makes sense considering it’s an 8x erector. Love the glass though. My first day with it I thought I was going to sell it but after using it more it’s a keeper.