Looking at the NX8 for a dedicated hunting scope for shots ranginging from 60 yards to 500 yards. Leaning toward the 4-32 since ive read the 2.5-20 can be finicky(eye box, etc..) Also, sfp will be my choice. Anyone using the nx8 as a dedicated hunting scope or wish you would have went a different route? Plan to purchase this week and hope to validate my choice from those already using one.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes NX8 for hunting
- Thread starter GibsonL5
- Start date
I bought my first nx8 2.5x20 about 4 weeks ago, didn't notice a finicky eye box at all and would not hesitate to use it for hunting in fact it might get moved to a hunting rifle. It will do all you need I like it as much as my actars its more compact and saves a little weight.
Thats good to hear from you, as ive heard others complain on the 2.5-20 eye box and edge distortion. I would probably rather have it, but read many reviews suggesting going with the 4-32. Thanks for insight.
Last edited:
I've been using the NX8 4-32 FFP for over a year now hunting South Texas. MIL-C is a great reticle for hunting, no clutter. And the extra zoom lets you live score or judge animals a bit easier at distance. A great crossover scope in my opinion. I haven't had any big issue with eye box, only thing being picky is... I'd prefer parallax to be numbered like the ATACR.
Well, thats good to hear. Ive never looked through a ffp scope that i thought woukd work for my hunting. Main concern being low light and on 4 power, but again ive never looked through a nx8. So, no issues in low light and minimum power with the ffp nx8?
The illumination definitely helps. I'm typically looking at distances of 150-250 yds in our blinds so 4x really isn't in my useful range, I couldn't give it honest grade there. Without the illum I think that's an issue with most FFP. Sometimes I feel the SFP reticle is too big at low mag.
hunted with the 2.5-20 FFP . Never noticed the eye box
It captures light well and I've sat pretty late to see how far and long I could see without illumination. The scope didn't hold me back and illumination then made it much easier. But by the time you actually need illumination.. .you probably should be out of the stand or getting the thermal out. If you are going to be shooting to 500 and dialing or using the reticle it's a great scope. I swapped mine out for a vx5hd because my shots are 99% close and the vx5 will dial well enough for the odd ball long shot.
If I went out west or somewhere, I'd get the 2.5x20 FFP again and keep the vx5 SFP for hunting in AL where I'm blasting pigs mostly these days.
It's a great scope in my opinion and you can take it to the range and shoot 1k all day long then go deer hunt and not worry about the tracking.
It captures light well and I've sat pretty late to see how far and long I could see without illumination. The scope didn't hold me back and illumination then made it much easier. But by the time you actually need illumination.. .you probably should be out of the stand or getting the thermal out. If you are going to be shooting to 500 and dialing or using the reticle it's a great scope. I swapped mine out for a vx5hd because my shots are 99% close and the vx5 will dial well enough for the odd ball long shot.
If I went out west or somewhere, I'd get the 2.5x20 FFP again and keep the vx5 SFP for hunting in AL where I'm blasting pigs mostly these days.
It's a great scope in my opinion and you can take it to the range and shoot 1k all day long then go deer hunt and not worry about the tracking.
I have 3-4 of the FFP and SFP NX8’s. All in MOA as they are used for hunting only. All 4-32. If I had to do over, I’d only pic SFP. Much easier to use the reticle in all conditions than the FFP is. The NX8 is definitely one of my favorites, but only in the 4-32. I liked nothing about the 20x version. While the NX8 isn’t perfect, it’s a solid hunting scope.
I did a lot of research and a lot of fooling around with hunting scopes around the 2k price range. My top two choices where the vortex razor hd lht 4.5-22x50 and the NF NX8 4-32x50. The glass to my eye was very similar. The feel of the two scopes was not the same. The NX8 felt a lot more durable. I’m going with the NX8.
I have an nx8 2.5x20 ffp. No finicky eye box for me. I have not noticed distortion on 20x either.
Sfp would make a great dedicated hunting scope in my opinion.
Sfp would make a great dedicated hunting scope in my opinion.
I recently got the nx8 in that power range for hunting and target shooting. It’s 2nd focal plane. I like that it has markings for 16x and 32x. I doubt I will do much hunting with the power on 32 but I can set it at 16 and have markings to hold if needed. I was worried the reticle would be to small if I went with ffp
In my experience, NX8 FFP, low power, hunting scenario, the reticle is difficult to see. For hunting I prefer SFP. Otherwise the 2.5-20 is fantastic!
I use an NX8 32x for hunting. FFP MIL C. Love it. Relatively light weight for a FFP scope yet super sturdy. Spend enough time behind it and the eye box thing becomes a moot point. Unless you just like the short and sexy part of the 20x, the 32x is only an ounce or so heavier and more power. However, I've shot behind some 20x's and they are a fine scope as well. FFP/SFP is probably going to be a personal choice. As mentioned above the MIL C is a nice, uncluttered reticle. Good luck and enjoy.
I’ve considered using the FFP 4-32 NX8 for varmint shooting (prairie dogs). A thin reticle at low power for me is no big deal for my application as low power is only used for scanning.
A question for you NX8 4-32 owners: what’s the eyebox like at 20x and 25x? Hopefully compared to a PST 5-25 or Razor Gen II 4.5-27, both of which I find quite easy to get behind.
A question for you NX8 4-32 owners: what’s the eyebox like at 20x and 25x? Hopefully compared to a PST 5-25 or Razor Gen II 4.5-27, both of which I find quite easy to get behind.
Eye box is just fine. In all honesty, I find that most people that complain about a tight eyebox Or hard to get behind are from inexperienced shooters. Like watching a lady who’s never shot get behind a rifle doing the head bob. If you’ve spent any time behind a rifle then it’s a non issue.
I find it a non issue. Just spend some time behind it on a regular basis and the eyebox thing will not be a thing.
Thanks for the replies. Don’t worry, I’ve spent plenty of time behind a rifle. What I’m getting at is a small irritation for a 5min string of fire turns into a major issue during an all-day shoot.
Varmint shooting typically has me behind the scope for hours at a time.
I’m wondering about a comparison between a couple of scopes that I am familiar with vs the 4-32 NX8. Barring that, then any comparison will help.
Shit I just noticed your post. I also have a razor hd lht 4.5-22 (forgot to mention that above). How did that scope’s eyebox compare to the NX8 4-32?
Btw I assumed that your “glass is similar” comment referred to glass clarity, CA, etc and not eyebox.
Last edited:
Love my NX8's. Been running them on hunting rifles for several years with zero complaints. High power for looking and sizing animals, shots typically around 12x so I can see impacts
My first copy (early adopter) of the NX8 2.5-20x50 FFP left a lot to be desired, it had considerable edge distortion, eyebox was tight, parallax and DOF was not very forgiving. An overall disappointing experience. A friend sent me his 2.5-20x50 earlier this year, I thought it was a different scope, if I didn't know any better I'd would have thought it was a Gen 2 version because it did not exhibit any of the behavior of that first scope??? Sure, it is an ultra short design with a high magnification erector which equates to being more finicky in eyebox, DOF and parallax; however, the latest version did not seem to "suffer" like the first one did, and the edge distortion was gone, it had impressive edge to edge sharpness. Could it have been sample variance, was my original scope one that should not have passed through QC, did NF get so much feedback on how messy the early scopes were they made some changes to later versions (scope manufacturer's do this more than you realize)? If all the newer 2.5-20 scopes are as good as my friends, then I would give this scope a highly recommended thumbs up, at some point I will get another for a future rig and hopefully have a similar experience to this latest copy.
I'm not a fan of the NX8 at all, returned my 4-32 after comparing with other scopes I own, but would absolutely recommend it as a hunting tool. Checks a lot of boxes on paper, and if those unique attributes/features make it the best candidate for you, go for it, especially if they may have fixed/improved it from the early examples.
I have a NX8 2.5-20 ffp Mil-C for my hunting rifle. It does everything I need it to and I've taken several elk and deer with it. I never noticed the edge distortion until I read about it on here, but now I can see it. It's definitely not a problem and my parallax definitely isn't a set it and forget it, but again its within what i would consider acceptable.
IMO. There is nothing in that price range with similar features I would trust more.
IMO. There is nothing in that price range with similar features I would trust more.
I almost bought a 2.5-20x a few months back but the eyebox kept giving me issues. Had to be exactly 100% perfect which, when hunting or shooting a match, isn’t guaranteed.
That said, the higher the magnification on the high end could help with target ID (minimum point/antler requirements if you do QDMA) and mid range could be helpful scanning your lanes.
If the optic works for your eye then go for it. Great optics
That said, the higher the magnification on the high end could help with target ID (minimum point/antler requirements if you do QDMA) and mid range could be helpful scanning your lanes.
If the optic works for your eye then go for it. Great optics
I have a Mil-XT 4-32 FFP I am going to list if you’re interested. It got zeroed last year and has just been sitting in the safe ever since.
I have the 4-32 SFP in MOA and really like it. I hunt and target shoot with it. So far I’ve taken it out to 1000 yards and it has performed admirably. The eye box is fine at lower magnification. When dialed up to 32 I have to get closer to the scope and then all
Is fine. I’ve given the 2.5-20 some serious thought since I am needing another scope for another rifle I have. I’m hesitant because of the eye box issues I’ve read on line. I’m going to have to see one in person before getting one though. At this point thought I wouldn’t hesitate to get another 4-32 like I have now. All around very good scope
Is fine. I’ve given the 2.5-20 some serious thought since I am needing another scope for another rifle I have. I’m hesitant because of the eye box issues I’ve read on line. I’m going to have to see one in person before getting one though. At this point thought I wouldn’t hesitate to get another 4-32 like I have now. All around very good scope
Eyebox seem pretty similar to me at the same power between scopes….yeah, in all different aspects glass seemed pretty similar. I did not get to compare them side by side in low light conditions just mid day light with a decent amount of mirage.
Hey, thx! Just so I’m clear between us, eyebox = the ease of getting behind the scope without seeing those black crescents as one wiggles his head side to side. Right?
I only mention this because some people think eye relief = eyebox. Just checking so I don’t make an expensive mistake!
Yeah that’s how I understand what eye box is. The only thing extra you are paying for with the NX8 is a more durable, better built scope. IMO
Essentially, yes, eye relief does play a part but eyebox is really that zone where the image still fills the full circle without any shadowing. Always mount your scope on the rifle at maximum magnification and align it so you see the full image through the scope when bringing the rifle to your natural hold. I close my eyes and bring the rifle to my shoulder and put my cheek down, then I open my shooting eye and very position, once I get the scope in the right spot, I then do this several times (close eyes, bring to shoulder, cheek down, open eye). There are a number of methods of course, but this one has yielded the best results for me with regard to proper scope position. The reason for putting on max magnification is this is typically where the scope is the most finicky with eyebox, so if you mount the scope in an ideal location at max mag, then as you reduce mag it should be even better.
Can you explain to me your thinking on a preference for SFP? Not looking for an argument, I just honestly don't understand people's preference for SFP. I am the opposite, I almost always prefer FFP.
Usually it's because: low mag, sub-200 yds, dark-ish, in tree/bush cover. Way easier to see most SFP reticles in those conditions.
I hunt at higher mags (15-27x), 200-500 yds, bright daylight, open country so I like FFP.
I would say half of my optics are FFP and half are SFP. All of my hunting optics are usually, not always but usually SFP for the above mentioned. If Im in dark timber, low light, etc and especially if taking a quick shot, I don’t want to have to adjust magnification or try and hit the illumination in order to see my reticle. I usually ask the opposite question. I’ve hunted years with both first and second focal planes. I see no reason whatsoever to ever choose a FFP for hunting, and honestly haven’t had anyone once explain to me why they do. My self including everyone I know and that I’ve ever talked with all dial when taking a long shot on an animal. And while taking an extended range shot, you’re almost always on full power. So if you do choose to use your reticle, most SFP reticles align on max magnification….which most use at long range. I guess I don’t see a use for a FFP for a hunting optic.
My exception is for shooting prairie dogs. May/may not be called hunting, but FFP is sweet in that application as one may not always be on the max power that one’s SFP reticle is set up for.
Often I am not on max, as something like 18-20x is much more eyebox-friendly than, say, 25-27x. Plus, the suckers can appear mighty close and then suddenly far away, forcing one to zoom in/out.
And with prairie dog shooting, one tends to be on the gun a long time vs. one quick shot.
But I agree with you for most types of hunting.
Last edited:
You know I never thought about that. I take people prairie dog hunting all the time (guide) in the off season. And often times and quite honestly most times it would be much better to have a FFP for the reasons you mentioned.
I’ve got the nx8 4-32 milxt on my hunting rig, all by other rifles are wearing zco. Nx8 is my favorite for saving some weight from the zcomps, and the perfect hunting scope for me unless you’re looking for an ultralight
