-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes SWFA vs Nightforce
- Thread starter RESQGUY
- Start date
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
The only thing that I liked about the SWFA more than the NF was the eye relief, it is longer than the NF. The eyebox was very forgiving on the SS until you around 17-20, then you had to be right behind it. Other than that, the NF has my vote on every other aspect. And I also didnt care for the reticle on the SS either, just didnt dig the diamond dots.
The only thing that I liked about the SWFA more than the NF was the eye relief, it is longer than the NF. The eyebox was very forgiving on the SS until you around 17-20, then you had to be right behind it. Other than that, the NF has my vote on every other aspect. And I also didnt care for the reticle on the SS either, just didnt dig the diamond dots.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
The glass is pretty close, and the SS is first focal plane, all for less money, I chose the SS.
The glass is pretty close, and the SS is first focal plane, all for less money, I chose the SS.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
Nightforce does have the F1.
More and IMO better reticle options, better turrets, 10 mils per turn, Zero stops, proven track record, better illumination .
Nightforce looks like an easy winner to me.
Nightforce does have the F1.
More and IMO better reticle options, better turrets, 10 mils per turn, Zero stops, proven track record, better illumination .
Nightforce looks like an easy winner to me.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dieselgeek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nightforce does have the F1.
More and IMO better reticle options, better turrets, 10 mils per turn, Zero stops, proven track record, better illumination .
Nightforce looks like an easy winner to me. </div></div>The SS also has 10 mils per rev, as well as (easier) to adjust illumination.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dieselgeek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nightforce does have the F1.
More and IMO better reticle options, better turrets, 10 mils per turn, Zero stops, proven track record, better illumination .
Nightforce looks like an easy winner to me. </div></div>The SS also has 10 mils per rev, as well as (easier) to adjust illumination.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
I actually don't really mind the diamond reticle in the SS, I've been pretty happy with mine. Glass looks better in the SS to my eyes than a couple Nightforce's I've looked through.
Although I will say that the turrets are somewhat annoying in that it sometimes has some slop in between the hash marks and with mine the turret cap slides down to zero only on about every other hash mark..other than that, I love it
I actually don't really mind the diamond reticle in the SS, I've been pretty happy with mine. Glass looks better in the SS to my eyes than a couple Nightforce's I've looked through.
Although I will say that the turrets are somewhat annoying in that it sometimes has some slop in between the hash marks and with mine the turret cap slides down to zero only on about every other hash mark..other than that, I love it
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
One thing I wanted to know is how a Bushnell HDMR compares to both the models mentioned above.
One thing I wanted to know is how a Bushnell HDMR compares to both the models mentioned above.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: WACADOO</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dieselgeek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nightforce does have the F1.
More and IMO better reticle options, better turrets, 10 mils per turn, Zero stops, proven track record, better illumination .
Nightforce looks like an easy winner to me. </div></div>The SS also has 10 mils per rev, as well as (easier) to adjust illumination. </div></div>
On a nightforce you simply pull the knob out....... Doesn't get much easier.
I have a NF 5.5-22x50, I like it alot. I got it awhile back and it still has 1/4 MOA knobs so it's got to get sent back in. I can say that I've been pretty rough on it and it's held up plenty fine.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: WACADOO</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dieselgeek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nightforce does have the F1.
More and IMO better reticle options, better turrets, 10 mils per turn, Zero stops, proven track record, better illumination .
Nightforce looks like an easy winner to me. </div></div>The SS also has 10 mils per rev, as well as (easier) to adjust illumination. </div></div>
On a nightforce you simply pull the knob out....... Doesn't get much easier.
I have a NF 5.5-22x50, I like it alot. I got it awhile back and it still has 1/4 MOA knobs so it's got to get sent back in. I can say that I've been pretty rough on it and it's held up plenty fine.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
I saw where Bushy launched some new scopes too. I came here to look for threads on them. They are stepping up. back to looking
I saw where Bushy launched some new scopes too. I came here to look for threads on them. They are stepping up. back to looking
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
They are both good scopes in my opinion. I have not used any 5.5-22x's rather the 3.5-15x's is what I own. That said I prefer the SS reticle to the NP-R1, MLR and Mildot in my NF's scopes.
With the cost ever increasing on NF products and the current price point of SWFA I don’t see myself buying very many more NF products. It’s not that it is necessarily the better optic, but with the features the SS has and my experience with the two 5-20x units I have I can’t justify spending more for less, or a lot more for nearly the same features. YMMV
They are both good scopes in my opinion. I have not used any 5.5-22x's rather the 3.5-15x's is what I own. That said I prefer the SS reticle to the NP-R1, MLR and Mildot in my NF's scopes.
With the cost ever increasing on NF products and the current price point of SWFA I don’t see myself buying very many more NF products. It’s not that it is necessarily the better optic, but with the features the SS has and my experience with the two 5-20x units I have I can’t justify spending more for less, or a lot more for nearly the same features. YMMV
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
I don't have enough experience with the 5.5-22x nightforce to say, But the Nightforce F1 is better than the SS by a decent margin optically.
I'm not sure if all new Nightforces scopes are better. I looked through a friend's Early F1, and it was not nearly as clear as the last few F1's I looked through. Or if only the F1 got the optics update.
On 15x, the SS's image at 800 yards is yellowish and hazy. While the Nightforce's image at 15x was crystal clear and bright. Not that the SS is bad, it's perfectly capable of shooting long range, but It leaves a bit to be desired in my eyes.
It may be sample variation, or maybe the new Nightforce F1's are clearer. But We compared a S&B PMII 5-25x, USO 3.2-17, and Nightforce F1 at the same magnification and surprisingly the Nightforce came in first. The PMII had slightly brighter colors, but the image was duller, and not as sharp.
I don't know if all of the new Nightforce scopes received an optics upgrade, or if the F1 is the gem in the lineup, but the F1 is the most expensive of their scopes.
I want to also mention that, looking at 100 yards, they all look pretty similar. But once you get to 600-800 yards, the difference is more apparent.
I don't have enough experience with the 5.5-22x nightforce to say, But the Nightforce F1 is better than the SS by a decent margin optically.
I'm not sure if all new Nightforces scopes are better. I looked through a friend's Early F1, and it was not nearly as clear as the last few F1's I looked through. Or if only the F1 got the optics update.
On 15x, the SS's image at 800 yards is yellowish and hazy. While the Nightforce's image at 15x was crystal clear and bright. Not that the SS is bad, it's perfectly capable of shooting long range, but It leaves a bit to be desired in my eyes.
It may be sample variation, or maybe the new Nightforce F1's are clearer. But We compared a S&B PMII 5-25x, USO 3.2-17, and Nightforce F1 at the same magnification and surprisingly the Nightforce came in first. The PMII had slightly brighter colors, but the image was duller, and not as sharp.
I don't know if all of the new Nightforce scopes received an optics upgrade, or if the F1 is the gem in the lineup, but the F1 is the most expensive of their scopes.
I want to also mention that, looking at 100 yards, they all look pretty similar. But once you get to 600-800 yards, the difference is more apparent.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RESQGUY</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SWFA 5-20X50 vs Nightforce 5-22x50
Anyone have both? How does the glass compare? Is the extra money on NF worth it. </div></div>
NF offerings on the 5-22 are not FFP. FFP into greater then 15-16x or best utility across mag range (keeping the lower 4-5x) is a matter of opinion and applied reticle stadia. The trend is the need with FFP to 20x+. The issue I see is retention of mil stadia definiton, optically, at 3-5x given a 5-6x magnification ratio.
The SS mil-quad isn't really the issue in topic comparion for FFP IMO. I don't care for the reticle but have other issues. Big, fast, knobs are great; clicky-click. The knobs do not need to require such effort to be deemed worthy of the "positive clicks" award often used. The parallax adjustment on the 5-20 SS illuminated completely sucks behind rifle. The non-illum still has short knob as I looked into a trade. Put a tall butter knob on it. From a control standpoint, it needs some practical tweaks IMO.
The NF works fine but again this is not apples to apples as a SFP scope. I don't get bent out of shape comparing the optical image.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RESQGUY</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SWFA 5-20X50 vs Nightforce 5-22x50
Anyone have both? How does the glass compare? Is the extra money on NF worth it. </div></div>
NF offerings on the 5-22 are not FFP. FFP into greater then 15-16x or best utility across mag range (keeping the lower 4-5x) is a matter of opinion and applied reticle stadia. The trend is the need with FFP to 20x+. The issue I see is retention of mil stadia definiton, optically, at 3-5x given a 5-6x magnification ratio.
The SS mil-quad isn't really the issue in topic comparion for FFP IMO. I don't care for the reticle but have other issues. Big, fast, knobs are great; clicky-click. The knobs do not need to require such effort to be deemed worthy of the "positive clicks" award often used. The parallax adjustment on the 5-20 SS illuminated completely sucks behind rifle. The non-illum still has short knob as I looked into a trade. Put a tall butter knob on it. From a control standpoint, it needs some practical tweaks IMO.
The NF works fine but again this is not apples to apples as a SFP scope. I don't get bent out of shape comparing the optical image.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: peacemaker.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the Nightforce F1 is better than the SS by a decent margin optically. </div></div>
This reminds me. Sorry I was away from the board a bit and forgot about the last thread you mentioned this.
I don't doubt your comparison at all, but I think that particular F1 showing better resolution than the S&B hints it may be a significantly above average example. Maybe it got the Mil-Spec glass? I have yet to see (or hear of anybody else seeing) a 5-20 with yellowish, hazy glass. If that was the case something must have been wrong.
In any case, when the question is about the 5.5-22 SFP NF, implying it can expect it to be better than the 5-20 optically is setting people up for disappointment IMHO.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: peacemaker.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the Nightforce F1 is better than the SS by a decent margin optically. </div></div>
This reminds me. Sorry I was away from the board a bit and forgot about the last thread you mentioned this.
I don't doubt your comparison at all, but I think that particular F1 showing better resolution than the S&B hints it may be a significantly above average example. Maybe it got the Mil-Spec glass? I have yet to see (or hear of anybody else seeing) a 5-20 with yellowish, hazy glass. If that was the case something must have been wrong.
In any case, when the question is about the 5.5-22 SFP NF, implying it can expect it to be better than the 5-20 optically is setting people up for disappointment IMHO.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Northland</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: WACADOO</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dieselgeek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nightforce does have the F1.
More and IMO better reticle options, better turrets, 10 mils per turn, Zero stops, proven track record, better illumination .
Nightforce looks like an easy winner to me. </div></div>The SS also has 10 mils per rev, as well as (easier) to adjust illumination. </div></div>
On a nightforce you simply pull the knob out....... Doesn't get much easier. </div></div>That's exactly my point. After you pull the knob out, you can't just turn it from 1 to 11 like the SS to change how brite is.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Northland</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: WACADOO</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dieselgeek</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Nightforce does have the F1.
More and IMO better reticle options, better turrets, 10 mils per turn, Zero stops, proven track record, better illumination .
Nightforce looks like an easy winner to me. </div></div>The SS also has 10 mils per rev, as well as (easier) to adjust illumination. </div></div>
On a nightforce you simply pull the knob out....... Doesn't get much easier. </div></div>That's exactly my point. After you pull the knob out, you can't just turn it from 1 to 11 like the SS to change how brite is.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
I did a personal review of scopes as I upgraded rifles back in August. I have nothing negative to say about Nightforce, they are great scopes.
I chose the SWFA 5x20 for the front focal plane and the price. The optics are plenty clear for me and the price was right for what it is. I now have two of them with no regrets. The ability to mil at all magnifications was what put it over the top for me. I like the reticle and mil/mil adjustments as well, though they are available on most tactical scopes.
I did a personal review of scopes as I upgraded rifles back in August. I have nothing negative to say about Nightforce, they are great scopes.
I chose the SWFA 5x20 for the front focal plane and the price. The optics are plenty clear for me and the price was right for what it is. I now have two of them with no regrets. The ability to mil at all magnifications was what put it over the top for me. I like the reticle and mil/mil adjustments as well, though they are available on most tactical scopes.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
My only NF is an 8-32BR so I can't say too much about that part of the comparison, what I did find surprising was how much I actually like the SS mil-quad reticle.
I've found the reticle and in particular the diamonds themselves to be darned easy and quick to use for milling in the 0.1/0.2 range and useful in the shooting I've done with mine. Personally I think that reticle choice may be the most personal thing in shooting. What you like or what is the cats meow for me may be just plain annoying to the next person
My only NF is an 8-32BR so I can't say too much about that part of the comparison, what I did find surprising was how much I actually like the SS mil-quad reticle.
I've found the reticle and in particular the diamonds themselves to be darned easy and quick to use for milling in the 0.1/0.2 range and useful in the shooting I've done with mine. Personally I think that reticle choice may be the most personal thing in shooting. What you like or what is the cats meow for me may be just plain annoying to the next person
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
The SWFA SS 5-20s that I have (3 of them) were all brighter than the NXS 3-15 and the 5-22 that I compared them to. The SWFA is FFP, the other two were not. The NXS has a long track record for durability, the SWFA is newer so more results will come, but so far it seems to be holding up well.
The SWFA SS 5-20s that I have (3 of them) were all brighter than the NXS 3-15 and the 5-22 that I compared them to. The SWFA is FFP, the other two were not. The NXS has a long track record for durability, the SWFA is newer so more results will come, but so far it seems to be holding up well.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Personally I think that reticle choice may be the most personal thing in shooting. What you like or what is the cats meow for me may be just plain annoying to the next person </div></div>
You said a mouthful there!
Reticles are like underwear. Some guys can get by with boxers and others need the support of boxer briefs!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: XTR</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Personally I think that reticle choice may be the most personal thing in shooting. What you like or what is the cats meow for me may be just plain annoying to the next person </div></div>
You said a mouthful there!
Reticles are like underwear. Some guys can get by with boxers and others need the support of boxer briefs!
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
I found the cross hair to be really thick on the SS. On the NF it is really thin and better for long range IMO. I also believe the NF has more adjustment for elevation and windage.
I found the cross hair to be really thick on the SS. On the NF it is really thin and better for long range IMO. I also believe the NF has more adjustment for elevation and windage.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
I had the NF 5.5-22x56. I started shooting tactical competitions and realized I needed FFP. I sold the NF and picked up the SS.
The glass is no comparison to my eyes, SS all the way. Eye box too. I personally like the diamond reticle, but as someone already mentioned that is personal.
My SS has the documented turrets not lining up and it is very annoying. While I have only ever used the illumination on each just to check it out, the NF is way better. My SS bleeds badly.
If both were the same price, I would buy the SS. However, the SS is cheaper...yet another plus.
I had the NF 5.5-22x56. I started shooting tactical competitions and realized I needed FFP. I sold the NF and picked up the SS.
The glass is no comparison to my eyes, SS all the way. Eye box too. I personally like the diamond reticle, but as someone already mentioned that is personal.
My SS has the documented turrets not lining up and it is very annoying. While I have only ever used the illumination on each just to check it out, the NF is way better. My SS bleeds badly.
If both were the same price, I would buy the SS. However, the SS is cheaper...yet another plus.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fireguyty</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
My SS has the documented turrets not lining up and it is very annoying. </div></div>
Have you considered the option to set your zero 0.1 mil high (or low) at 100 so it will line up all the way around? When you think about it being off by 0.1 at anything over 100 yds is really not significant for other than an F class target. Even at 1000 yds you'd be off by less than 4". For tactical shooting that's plenty.
Give it a try, it might make life easier.
Last time I looked I think my SS lined up on my rifle, but if it didn't that's what I'd do.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fireguyty</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
My SS has the documented turrets not lining up and it is very annoying. </div></div>
Have you considered the option to set your zero 0.1 mil high (or low) at 100 so it will line up all the way around? When you think about it being off by 0.1 at anything over 100 yds is really not significant for other than an F class target. Even at 1000 yds you'd be off by less than 4". For tactical shooting that's plenty.
Give it a try, it might make life easier.
Last time I looked I think my SS lined up on my rifle, but if it didn't that's what I'd do.
Re: SWFA vs Nightforce
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jon A</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: peacemaker.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the Nightforce F1 is better than the SS by a decent margin optically. </div></div>
This reminds me. Sorry I was away from the board a bit and forgot about the last thread you mentioned this.
I don't doubt your comparison at all, but I think that particular F1 showing better resolution than the S&B hints it may be a significantly above average example. Maybe it got the Mil-Spec glass? I have yet to see (or hear of anybody else seeing) a 5-20 with yellowish, hazy glass. If that was the case something must have been wrong.
In any case, when the question is about the 5.5-22 SFP NF, implying it can expect it to be better than the 5-20 optically is setting people up for disappointment IMHO.</div></div>
Jon, I haven't been able to compare the 5.5-22 NF with the 5-20 SS, and according to reports the 5-20 is clearer. I don't doubt this because the 5.5-22 was not as bright as the F1.
The comparison with the S&B is between two S&B scopes and two recent production F1's, non milspec. (which I believe that there is no difference in glass) The Nightforce edged out the S&B slightly.
I found the SS to be yellowish compared to the S&B, NF, and Premier. The USO has a similar warm tint. By hazy I mean not as clear as the pricer scopes, but by no means was it a bad scope.
I think the best advice in any case is to get behind every scope, and compare them first hand.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jon A</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: peacemaker.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the Nightforce F1 is better than the SS by a decent margin optically. </div></div>
This reminds me. Sorry I was away from the board a bit and forgot about the last thread you mentioned this.
I don't doubt your comparison at all, but I think that particular F1 showing better resolution than the S&B hints it may be a significantly above average example. Maybe it got the Mil-Spec glass? I have yet to see (or hear of anybody else seeing) a 5-20 with yellowish, hazy glass. If that was the case something must have been wrong.
In any case, when the question is about the 5.5-22 SFP NF, implying it can expect it to be better than the 5-20 optically is setting people up for disappointment IMHO.</div></div>
Jon, I haven't been able to compare the 5.5-22 NF with the 5-20 SS, and according to reports the 5-20 is clearer. I don't doubt this because the 5.5-22 was not as bright as the F1.
The comparison with the S&B is between two S&B scopes and two recent production F1's, non milspec. (which I believe that there is no difference in glass) The Nightforce edged out the S&B slightly.
I found the SS to be yellowish compared to the S&B, NF, and Premier. The USO has a similar warm tint. By hazy I mean not as clear as the pricer scopes, but by no means was it a bad scope.
I think the best advice in any case is to get behind every scope, and compare them first hand.
