Rifle Scopes Nightforce NX8 Reticle Pics

[treillw]

Would anybody have pictures of the MOAR F1 reticle on high and low power for the NX8 2.5-20 and/or the 4-32?

I'm concerned about the reticles usability in lowlight/dark background conditions on low power. I know that's what illumination is for, but I don't like to rely on it for split second shots while hunting. There isn't always time to fuss with things before the animal is gone.

Thanks!

 

[xTBIRDx]

I have the Mil-C RETICLE I can see the it fine in low light. love this scope.

 

[wade2big]

All FFP scopes will suffer during low light shooting. This is one of the weaknesses of the design. The reticles are hard to see when dialed down and the scopes themselves tend to transmit less light through which costs me a few minutes of low light visibility which can make or break a hunt. If low light shooting is priority #1 then pass for a dedicated hunter. If low light is further down the list then I am sure it will be a great choice. If your hunting is 300 and in, I would pass on a FFP scope for that purpose as well.

I have yet to find a FFP scope in any price range that bests a $250 leupold in most hunting situations. The Razor gen ii, Steiner M5xI, LRTSI, SWFa 5-20, just to name a few give up several minutes of low light shooting to Low to midpriced SFP hunting scopes. It may be due to the design that FFP scopes just don’t permit as much light through the scope. Maybe other guys with real life hunting experience using both will chime in with their opinions.

Yesterday morning I had several axis come out 10 minutes after sunrise and left 5 minutes later before I could verify my target. I could not be 100% certain at that time that I had a doe to shoot and not a yearling spike. Had I had a Leupold or better yet Swarvski scope, i probably could have taken the shot. Hell if I had some lower power binoculars to verify I could have made the shot. I was using a LrTSI 4.5-18. Great FFP hunting scope but has it’s weaknesses just as a thick SFP duplex reticle scope has it’s weakness and limitations. The latter scope would have been ideal in this hunting location as ranges are short where my LrTSI is ideal when I hunt other places due to longer shots being possible. Pick the right tool for the job. The good news is yesterday evening I downed two axis does.

 

[wade2big]

I have the Mil-C RETICLE I can see the it fine in low light. love this scope.

Have you hunted with it? Looked at game with it to see a doe vs yearling buck, a 8 point with small kickers vs a six point, a spike vs a four point with small forks? To hunters this matters. If you have, do you feel like you lose a few minutes early and a few minutes late to make those crucial calls?

I can see aminals just fine with the FFP scopes I have used, I just can’t resolve details that matter as quick or as early/late in low light situations as some of the dedicated SFP hunting scopes.


I like having two rifles depending on where I hunt. Open space is a rifle with a good FFP scope. Under cover with shorter shots the normal, i like a rifle with a thicker duplex reticle SFP scope. I just decide which attributes are most important when and where I am going tk hunt and choose accordingly.

 

[xTBIRDx]

Have you hunted with it? Looked at game with it to see a doe vs yearling buck, a 8 point with small kickers vs a six point, a spike vs a four point with small forks? To hunters this matters. If you have, do you feel like you lose a few minutes early and a few minutes late to make those crucial calls?

I can see aminals just fine with the FFP scopes I have used, I just can’t resolve details that matter as quick or as early/late in low light situations as some of the dedicated SFP hunting scopes.


I like having two rifles depending on where I hunt. Open space is a rifle with a good FFP scope. Under cover with shorter shots the normal, i like a rifle with a thicker duplex reticle SFP scope. I just decide which attributes are most important when and where I am going tk hunt and choose accordingly.

I have watched Whitetails late in the evening and I wouldn't have a problem shoot after hours in certain areas. As with anything I lose minutes with the tree line in my background as opposed to open fields.

 

[wade2big]

I have watched Whitetails late in the evening and I wouldn't have a problem shoot after hours in certain areas. As with anything I lose minutes with the tree line in my background as opposed to open fields.

Yes sir. Under timber and cloudy skies can sure make it tough to identify what is legal or desired.

 

[.50 Cal Cow]

I have yet to find a FFP scope in any price range that bests a $250 leupold in most hunting situations. The Razor gen ii, Steiner M5xI, LRTSI, SWFa 5-20, just to name a few give up several minutes of low light shooting to Low to midpriced SFP hunting scopes. It may be due to the design that FFP scopes just don’t permit as much light through the scope. Maybe other guys with real life hunting experience using both will chime in with their opinions.

I hunt lots of PA heavy woods but do not feign to be any expert and I’m sure your hunting credentials far outweigh mine, however, i just performed a side by side comparison from daylight into the fleeting moments of daylight into wooded treeline comparing my new Nightforce 4-16x42F1, to my Zeiss 4-16x50 conquest v4 (low to midprice optic) and USO B17.

The general take aways were that both FFP optics did better at providing bright image and being able to resolve twigs/branches etc. past what the Zeiss could do. The NF beat all three at low power picture, the USO beat both at higher power. I think the Zeiss is a great value / dollar scope but the others just beat it hands down.

The reticle on the USO is on the thicker side and fairly usable at lower magnifications but the NF was definitely not at lower power without the help of illumination.

I also had some real life experience this year with the Zeiss at early hours and a herd of white tail about 50-70 yards from me and was not able gather the PID to capitalize. As stated under daylight conditions though this scope does very well for its price point.

I am in your camp about using the right tool for the job to stay legal and not cross ethical boundaries. For example last year when I used a kahles 624 to hunt PA woods I quickly learned that was the wrong tool lol. However, based on my growing experience comparing these 3 scopes I’ve yet to see what from an optical standpoint where I would be hindered despite being FFP.

EDIT: edited to complete partial sentence.

 

[Atomic donut]

I have an NX8 4-32 F1 in MOAR. I’ll put some pics up in a little bit for you

 

[Atomic donut]

4x

 

[Atomic donut]

20x

 

[Atomic donut]

32x

 

[SD Carpenter]

I hunted with mine in October on a successful antelope hunt... The rain and wind was pretty bad on opening day with gusts between 20-40 mph... Luckily I was able to stalk to about 300 yards.

But yes, the scope performed fine, didn't use illumination, it's hard to remember exactly due to the excitement but I know I wasn't over 8x power.

 

[Atomic donut]

The scope is nice because it has Green and Red illumination. I haven’t had any issues tracking on any of the NF F1 scopes

 

[treillw]

Thank you for posting that donut. I have to say that I'm not crazy about it. When a 6x6 bull blows out of the dark timber and I have 2 seconds to shoot, I want to have a vertical point of reference visible on 4x.

A couple years ago I looked at every FFP scope out there in the 3-20 power range. I settled on the march 3-24x52. The scope isn't perfect, but they certainly have the reticle figured out for my intended use. My grandma can see it on 3x and I can shoot a 1" dot at 400 yards with it for load development.

I wish nightforce would come out with something along these lines. They are breaking into the lightweight scope market with the NX8, where mountain hunters will be interested in the scope, but I think the reticle still is lacking something. If it had a reticle similar to this, I'd be buying at least one....

 

[Pappasniper]

I have this scope in Mil MIL, but I really dont think F1 is great with LPVO scopes. Just me maybe.

PB

 

[Atomic donut]

I have bad eyes too so every scope if ever used I’ve had to use the illumination to see the reticle lol. If you do decide to try one out, I have one in MOAR I’d be willing to part with at a decent price or for the right trade. Just PM me if interested.

 

[beetroot]

I have this scope in Mil MIL, but I really dont think F1 is great with LPVO scopes. Just me maybe.

PB

Not just you, I too don't like FFP in a scope that tops out anything less than 10x, even 12x I'm happy with SFP.

 

[Lawnboi]

Have you hunted with it? Looked at game with it to see a doe vs yearling buck, a 8 point with small kickers vs a six point, a spike vs a four point with small forks? To hunters this matters. If you have, do you feel like you lose a few minutes early and a few minutes late to make those crucial calls?

I can see aminals just fine with the FFP scopes I have used, I just can’t resolve details that matter as quick or as early/late in low light situations as some of the dedicated SFP hunting scopes.


I like having two rifles depending on where I hunt. Open space is a rifle with a good FFP scope. Under cover with shorter shots the normal, i like a rifle with a thicker duplex reticle SFP scope. I just decide which attributes are most important when and where I am going tk hunt and choose accordingly.

The focal plane deals only with the reticle. It should make no difference in magnification and identifying targets. Now FOV and low light performance are two entirely separate factors in a scope buying decision.

Iv seen and have ffp scopes with fairly thick reticles that I have no problem using, but also have seen scopes with reticles that would not work for hunting. If your hunting is fairly close in, and do not require much in terms of magnification, I say go for the SFP scope.

I would agree that a low power scope is better in SFP for hunting. I’d draw that line at around 10x.

Just about having the right tool for the job as said above. My plan is to run a pic rail and have two distinct scopes for hunting back home in WI, and slapping on for hunting out west where shots may be longer

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

If a guys hunting strictly in the timber then I'd agree that ffp is totally unnecessary.

I will say though I've played around with crossover scopes, zeiss v4's and v6's, vx5, and vx6 and I think they are the wrong tool for LR hunting.

I run two Mk5's now, a 3.6-18 on my lightweight mixed use rifle, and a 5-25 on my dedicated elk rifle.

This season I bumped my biggest buck yet in the brush and had no problem seeing him for a quick kill shot on 5 power at 300 yards
My wife shot a bull in the timber with the same mk5 3-18 right before dark with zero issues.

I feel it's much more important to be to be able to dial my scope back a little for long range shots to spot hits or misses, and use my reticle for quicker LR shots where full power might be too much

 

[wade2big]

If a guys hunting strictly in the timber then I'd agree that ffp is totally unnecessary.

I will say though I've played around with crossover scopes, zeiss v4's and v6's, vx5, and vx6 and I think they are the wrong tool for LR hunting.

I run two Mk5's now, a 3.6-18 on my lightweight mixed use rifle, and a 5-25 on my dedicated elk rifle.

This season I bumped my biggest buck yet in the brush and had no problem seeing him for a quick kill shot on 5 power at 300 yards
My wife shot a bull in the timber with the same mk5 3-18 right before dark with zero issues.

I feel it's much more important to be to be able to dial my scope back a little for long range shots to spot hits or misses, and use my reticle for quicker LR shots where full power might be too much

I like what you are saying except for the spotting misses part. The shot shouldn’t be taken unless 100% certain of the result. Yes stuff does go wrong but hunting shouldn’t be treated the same as shooting steel. Extended range hunting like seen on TV is edited. They don’t show the bad shots and all the misses.

Other than that I agree.

 

[treillw]

I have A hunting rifle. I take it with me wherever I hunt. The spot I hunt mostly is timber with some areas of wide open parks. You can glass for miles, but if you walk 50 yards into the timber, you might not be able to see 30 yards.

Again the same rifle goes with me wherever I hunt - one day I could be walking timber. The next day I could be out east where there isn't a tree within 10 miles of me.

I want a scope that I can use effectively at the range for load development and for shooting steel for practice.

I use my reticle on high power and low power. The same scope can do multiple jobs.

Poor engineering isn't a good excuse for me to own two scopes, when one could do the job of both.

 

[wade2big]

I have A hunting rifle. I take it with me wherever I hunt. The spot I hunt mostly is timber with some areas of wide open parks. You can glass for miles, but if you walk 50 yards into the timber, you might not be able to see 30 yards.

Again the same rifle goes with me wherever I hunt - one day I could be walking timber. The next day I could be out east where there isn't a tree within 10 miles of me.

I want a scope that I can use effectively at the range for load development and for shooting steel for practice.

I use my reticle on high power and low power. The same scope can do multiple jobs.

Poor engineering isn't a good excuse for me to own two scopes, when one could do the job of both.

It’s not poor engineering. It is give and take. Nothing is free. If you have one scope that can “do the job of both” then you made the choice to accept its limitations in one area in order to take advantage of its strengths in others. No scope made is perfect under all conditions just like there is no vehicle that is either. Such is life. Pick something that is the best compromise and roll with it.

What is your rifle and scope of choice. There sure is some wisdom with sticking with one setup. I should do the same.

 

[treillw]

I have seen a lot of FFP scopes that have poorly thought out reticles. Some of them might as well not even have a low power.

I agree that there is always give and take. They just need to come out with more options that appeal to different users.

 

[treillw]

It's crazy to me that the reticle that donut posted has very little reference to the horizontal center of the scope. Couldn't they thicken the vertical cross hair up at least a little bit that it would show up at the bottom on low power?

I have a hard time seeing it in the picture.

Are a lot of people using all of the scope vertical adjustment, plus a 20 moa base, plus what is it? ~40 minutes on the vertical crosshair? (this is a semi serious question) Seems a little excessive to me. But I guess I may do things in a different way.

I'm done my rant ? Just frustrated that there is another scope on the market that is so close to being perfect for me, but misses one of my most important criteria. Hope they come out with more reticles in the future.

 

[Gledeasy]

With my 4-16 atacr in moar the reticle is not hard to see for us at low power. The March reticle was about the best I've seen at low end, well I guess the lrhs was good as well. I wish they would have kept the NX8 moar reticle more like the atacr. Instead they replaced the cross hairs for more hash marks, which you'd never be able to differentiate at low power. The change does make it easier to lose your crosshairs.

 

[DDT]

I have seen some NX8 scopes with MIL-C reticle which have more hash marks for windage/moving target correction compared to MIL-C in 5-25 and 7-35 F1 Atacrs. It looks they "updated" this reticle for more horizontal holds (+5mils with 0.2 hash marks at each side).

 

[deersniper]

All FFP scopes will suffer during low light shooting. This is one of the weaknesses of the design. The reticles are hard to see when dialed down and the scopes themselves tend to transmit less light through which costs me a few minutes of low light visibility which can make or break a hunt. If low light shooting is priority #1 then pass for a dedicated hunter. If low light is further down the list then I am sure it will be a great choice. If your hunting is 300 and in, I would pass on a FFP scope for that purpose as well.

I have yet to find a FFP scope in any price range that bests a $250 leupold in most hunting situations. The Razor gen ii, Steiner M5xI, LRTSI, SWFa 5-20, just to name a few give up several minutes of low light shooting to Low to midpriced SFP hunting scopes. It may be due to the design that FFP scopes just don’t permit as much light through the scope. Maybe other guys with real life hunting experience using both will chime in with their opinions.

Yesterday morning I had several axis come out 10 minutes after sunrise and left 5 minutes later before I could verify my target. I could not be 100% certain at that time that I had a doe to shoot and not a yearling spike. Had I had a Leupold or better yet Swarvski scope, i probably could have taken the shot. Hell if I had some lower power binoculars to verify I could have made the shot. I was using a LrTSI 4.5-18. Great FFP hunting scope but has it’s weaknesses just as a thick SFP duplex reticle scope has it’s weakness and limitations. The latter scope would have been ideal in this hunting location as ranges are short where my LrTSI is ideal when I hunt other places due to longer shots being possible. Pick the right tool for the job. The good news is yesterday evening I downed two axis does.

You need to try high end NF or Benders before you make that conclusion. My Atacrs give up nothing to 99% of scopes let alone some cheap leupold

 

[wade2big]

You need to try high end NF or Benders before you make that conclusion. My Atacrs give up nothing to 99% of scopes let alone some cheap leupold

Maybe so, but its a shame it takes a $3,000 nightforce or S&B to equal a $250 Leupold hunting scope in low light. My old man has a couple different Swarvski scopes and i have Leupolds, razors, Bushnell, and SWFa in my position. May mock up a set of antlers on a hay bale and see which lets me count points at 100 yards the closest to dark. Something to do at least and it would be more scientific than me going off memory.

@Lawnboi said that the FFP vs SFP has nothing to do with light transmission and he is probably right. It probably comes down to The build of the optic and what its more geared towards.

 

[wade2big]

I hunt lots of PA heavy woods but do not feign to be any expert and I’m sure your hunting credentials far outweigh mine, however, i just performed a side by side comparison from daylight into the fleeting moments of daylight into wooded treeline comparing my new Nightforce 4-16x42F1, to my Zeiss 4-16x50 conquest v4 (low to midprice optic) and USO B17.

The general take aways were that both FFP optics did better at providing bright image and being able to resolve twigs/branches etc. past what the Zeiss could do. The NF beat all three at low power picture, the USO beat both at higher power. I think the Zeiss is a great value / dollar scope but the others just beat it hands down.

The reticle on the USO is on the thicker side and fairly usable at lower magnifications but the NF was definitely not at lower power without the help of illumination.

I also had some real life experience this year with the Zeiss at early hours and a heard of white tail about 50-70 yards from me and gather the PID to capitalize.As stated under daylight conditions though

I am in your camp about using the right tool for the job to stay legal and not cross ethical boundaries. For example last year when I used a kahles 624 to hunt PA woods I quickly learned that was the wrong tool lol. However, based on my growing experience comparing these 3 scopes I’ve yet to see what from an optical standpoint where I would be hindered despite being FFP.

This was a well written response and we sure aren’t comparing credentials, but experiences. It very well could be the FFP scopes I have had access with just aren’t quite there At the last/first few precious minutes as @Lawnboi said the same as you.

i have been very successful with FFP scopes for hunting. I gravitate to the .05 or thicker reticles for this use as they help immensely when they are dialed down. Just like you said, an FFP for hunting MUST have illumination or do not use it as you will have the mag bottomed out at first and last light which will make that reticle disappear.

 

[Atomic donut]

Here are some more pics with the red illumination. It also has a green illumination. Apologies as my cellphone camera did not do a good job of focusing and came out sideways for some reason.

 

[Mendoza0311]

Would anybody have pictures of the MOAR F1 reticle on high and low power for the NX8 2.5-20 and/or the 4-32?

I'm concerned about the reticles usability in lowlight/dark background conditions on low power. I know that's what illumination is for, but I don't like to rely on it for split second shots while hunting. There isn't always time to fuss with things before the animal is gone.

Thanks!

I don’t have any pics of the reticle but this was the first year I used my NX8 Moar reticle on my custom Tikka for deer season I shot a few coyotes and hogs before sunrise and also at dusk and had no issue seeing in low light with this scope is very bright in low light. When I first saw the NX8 whole Moar reticle was fully illuminated instead of just the cross hair like the SHV line I was disappointed but after using it in low power with the lowest setting you get a wide view and easy spot your game with it.

 

[FreddyG]

You need to try high end NF or Benders before you make that conclusion. My Atacrs give up nothing to 99% of scopes let alone some cheap leupold

I completely agree. I use a Beast/ATACR with mil-r exclusively for hunting now. The weight sucks, but such is life. Having compared them at low light to SFP scopes such as vx3, z5, x5, nxs, there isn’t even a comparison in image clarity. The NF ATACR is hands down a winner. I thought that Swaro had great glass until I did a side by side with an ATACR in different conditions. Very eye opening.