Rifle Scopes Nightforce NX8 4-32x50 vs Leupold Mark 5HD 5-25x56 (Illuminated)

[WaypointNC]

Having a hard time choosing between two scopes for a 7mm PRC. I plan on using this optic to hunt with as well as target shoot. Hunting with this optic, I'd like it to be in good first and last light.

NX8: People state that the NF is more consistent with tracking and returning to zero. The reticle choices (Mil-XT and Mil-C) and illumination that come on NF's look better to me than the MK5. Said to have a tight eye-box.

Mark 5HD: Glass on the MK5 seems a little crisper/clear. I like that the MK5 has a larger tube size and objective diameter. MK5 has a locking elevation turret. I've read some people have issues with tracking and returning to zero.

Of the two, which would you choose?

 

[mtnhunter22]

tough one imo.

I like the PR2 better than the mil XT. By miles. Also think the glass is better on the MK 5 having compared them both side by side.

You may get mixed opinions on the tracking and return to zero.

Kept a MK 5 on my match gun and put NX8s on my hunting rifles for tracking and zero concerns.

If you haven’t already, do some googling. Tons of posts already out there comparing these two specifically.

 

[Luckyshot]

Having used the mk5HD's for several years, I highly recommend an NX8 instead. 4-32 since it's the same weight, and Ive heard the eyebox isn't bad at all compared to the 2.5-20

 

[simonp]

I have a couple of Mk 5's and a couple of NX8's, Id agree that the MK5 has better glass to my eyes and a better eyebox.

Ive not had any issues with the tracking yet.......

 

[Megalodong]

haha, I am very interested in this. I'm on the exact same fence and have been for like 6 months. I'm gonna have to make a decision here pretty soon.

Everything I have found is almost evenly split, as you can see here already.

 

[FuhQ]

Having a hard time choosing between two scopes for a 7mm PRC. I plan on using this optic to hunt with as well as target shoot. Hunting with this optic, I'd like it to be in good first and last light.

NX8: People state that the NF is more consistent with tracking and returning to zero. The reticle choices (Mil-XT and Mil-C) and illumination that come on NF's look better to me than the MK5. Said to have a tight eye-box.

Mark 5HD: Glass on the MK5 seems a little crisper/clear. I like that the MK5 has a larger tube size and objective diameter. MK5 has a locking elevation turret. I've read some people have issues with tracking and returning to zero.

Of the two, which would you choose?

NX8 4-32x50 MIL-XT all day long...

 

[Smokin7s]

I like nightforce mil c and milxt better than leupold reticles but I thought the scope was hot dog shit and started buying leupold with the pr1 reticle and I’m happy

 

[farwest]

Leupold Mark 5 PR1 illuminated or Zeiss LRP3 4x25x50

 

[FuhQ]

The Zeiss LRP S3 4-25x50 should be at the top of your list, as well...

 

[WaypointNC]

haha, I am very interested in this. I'm on the exact same fence and have been for like 6 months. I'm gonna have to make a decision here pretty soon.

Everything I have found is almost evenly split, as you can see here already.

Yeah it's hard to decide. I feel like I may prefer looking through the MK5 but I went back and forth looking through each one for like 20min at Cabelas. Hard to really tell without being behind one on a rifle and shooting it in the field.

 

[WaypointNC]

I like nightforce mil c and milxt better than leupold reticles but I thought the scope was hot dog shit and started buying leupold with the pr1 reticle and I’m happy

What didn't you like about the NX8?

 

[WaypointNC]

Leupold Mark 5 PR1 illuminated or Zeiss LRP3 4x25x50

I had bought an LRP S3 but did not really care for it. I didn't really care for the reticle and the eyebox was too finicky for me. I did not mount the optic so it may have been better on the rifle. I also liked the reticle/illumination on the NX8 better when I looked through it and the eyebox seemed better.

 

[WaypointNC]

The Zeiss LRP S3 4-25x50 should be at the top of your list, as well...

I had bought an LRP S3 but did not really care for it. I didn't really care for the reticle and the eyebox was too finicky for me. I did not mount the optic so it may have been better on the rifle. I also liked the reticle/illumination on the NX8 better when I looked through it and the eyebox seemed better.

 

[mrtoyz]

IMO Zeiss S3 is better glass than both but doesn’t have the track record yet and is heavy.
IMO the NX8 has better image quality than the MK5. Having said that though, I think you should get behind both and see which is better for your eyes. Make sure to set the diopter correctly while evaluating

 

[Cr1775]

Scopeye says buy them all and return the ones you dont like.

 

[Compadre]

I have both, I prefer using and looking through the Mark5 HD. I also know the NX8 is probably the more dependable scope. But I have shot well over 1000 rounds with my mark5 and it hasn’t lost zero.
I beat the crap out of my first Mk5. I got more solely because of how impressed I was with tracking.

 

[Jakeweb09]

I’ve got 3 nx8 mil-xts and sold my only mark5. That being said I kinda want another mark5 5-25 pr2. I think the glass is better on the NF but parallax is better on leupold, leading to some thinking glass is better. One problem I’ve had on the nx8 is the illumination kicks on upon recoil on larger mags, particularly I have a 9lb scoped and suppressed 7 prc, and illumination lights up on every shot. 2 seperate nx8s, both do it.

 

[Islas82]

I have a NF 4-32 on my rimfire now and I have owned the MK5 5-25 and 3-18 in the past. Glass wise I would give a slight edge to the NF but honestly my memory of the MK5 is not clear but I know it wasn’t far from the NF. Am running mil-xt on the NF and I like it quite a bit but I also like the PR2 a lot.

Turrets I’ll give it to the MK5. The turrets on the NF are soft plus you get a revolution indicator with the MK5.

I haven’t had an issue with the eye box on the NF. Seems fine to me. Parallax on the NF is fine but then again this is on a rimfire that only goes out to 425yds not sure what you’ll get stretching out your 7 PRC.

 

[Smokin7s]

What didn't you like about the NX8?

I think the glass is a full step below all of its competitors, foggy and discolored side-by-side with a mark 5 I was really unimpressed by the whole unit. I did load development on the rifle for a guy he had just bought the scope, I was actually in the market for one but that job looking through it discouraged me. I also don’t like nightforce turrets on any line from their shv to the atacr. I’m not a nightforce hater just not been impressed in the last couple years. The zero stops on them are a whole other story, woof.

 

[Secant]

Used ATACR 4-16x42. Better than an nx8, about the same price used as an NX8, only 1oz heavier than NX8, and you don’t pay $500 for illumination like Leupold.

 

[Smokin7s]

Used ATACR 4-16x42. Better than an nx8, about the same price used as an NX8, only 1oz heavier than NX8, and you don’t pay $500 for illumination like Leupold.

I was coyote hunting with my Schmidt pmii and my partner had his mk5 5-25 it gathered so much more light right at dark my illumination didn’t make up the difference so I switched

 

[Secant]

I was coyote hunting with my Schmidt pmii and my partner had his mk5 5-25 it gathered so much more light right at dark my illumination didn’t make up the difference so I switched

My Mk5 was exceedingly bright as well, in a good way. I don't think they are better than my Tangent or ZCOs, but I wouldn't expect them to be. The MK5 may be brighter than my 4-16 ATACR, but the ATACR is useable in low light hunting conditions for me.

 

[tacoman69]

Nightforce tracking/reliability>. i wouldn't put a leupold on a hunting rifle.

 

[Whistlepigs]

MK5 I have had for the last 3 years, zero issues and the glass is pretty damn good. Turned the dials a lot, always worked. Know 2 other people personally that also have never had any issues with theirs.

Have never compared to a NX8, but have compared to other scopes in same price range and more, nothin made me want to change.

 

[Burdy]

Man I hope they give us PR2 in the 3-18 for 24'

 

[stanley_white]

How the reticle works with your brain / eyes and customer service would be my tipping points in this discussion since performance seems close.

-Stan

 

[WaypointNC]

Man I hope they give us PR2 in the 3-18 for 24'

I'm wondering if I should wait until after Shot Show to decide. I'd like an illuminated PR2 but they'd probably announce that right after I purchase the PR1.

 

[Burdy]

I'm wondering if I should wait until after Shot Show to decide. I'd like an illuminated PR2 but they'd probably announce that right after I purchase the PR1.

Youve only got a couple of weeks, its always hard to buy optics in January unless its already exactly what you have been looking for.

 

[5RWill]

Give CStactical a call about the 3.6-18 with the PR2.

Between the two it depends on which ones. The 5-25 MK5 has extremely good resolution and absolutely stellar low light performance. Doesn’t control CA that well, FOV isn’t too great, and the parallax wasn’t my favorite. Its little brother is a step down in every category other than weight and form factor. But the 3.6-18 fills a very niche roll when it comes to size and weight, it’s sort of in a class of its own.

I’ve been behind two NX8s both the 2.5-20 and 4-32. Had the 4-32 next to a 4-16 atacr and my 3-18 Steiner T6Xi. I know the NX8 got off to a rough start. But honestly i was impressed with both renditions of the two samples I’ve seen. The short NX8 is a little too parallax sensitive for my taste. But the 4-32 is quite good. Resolution is a little lacking from the ATACR but it controls CA well, has decent FOV and DOF, and is relatively light. The parallax isn’t perfect but it’s to be expected given the 8x erector.

As for the track records. I’ve been on the negative end of leupold with my Mk6. But I’ve owned two MK5s without issue and rarely hear of them having issues. To my knowledge the Mk5 has been extremely reliable.

So ultimately i would advise stay away from the ultra shorts between the two. They will leave you wanting. Pick the reticle you want and see if you can get behind them side by side. I don’t think you can go wrong with either.

 

[Burdy]

The short NX8 is a little too parallax sensitive for my taste. But the 4-32 is quite good. Resolution is a little lacking from the ATACR but it controls CA well, has decent FOV and DOF, and is relatively light. The parallax isn’t perfect but it’s to be expected given the 8x erector.

Would you say there is a significant difference in parallax sensitivity of the 2.5-20 and 4-32 or just that the 4-32 is slightly better?

 

[5RWill]

Would you say there is a significant difference in parallax sensitivity of the 2.5-20 and 4-32 or just that the 4-32 is slightly better?

I think there is significant different to the point that i would avoid the 2.5-20 less i really needed that form factor.

 

[Burdy]

I think there is significant different to the point that i would avoid the 2.5-20 less i really needed that form factor.

Thanks, I ordered the 4-32.

 

[Smokin7s]

For what it’s worth I dropped my mk5 off the tailgate onto a black top road this weekend and it didn’t change zero at all landed on the bell and elevation turret. Pretty impressed with those and Hawkins light tactical rings