Nightforce vs..?????
- Thread starter mattri
- Start date
To keep an open mind on this subject: my gunsmith recently tested a new Sightron 10-50x 60mm, comparing it to his favorite scopes, the Leupold's. He reported that he was very impressed with the clarity, brightness, repeatability, tracking, etc. etc. He really did not have anything bad to say about the Sightron.
This is a guy who has been whacking g'hogs for the last 40 or so years & "specializing" in the longer distance targets of opportunity, at 750 yards and beyond. He knows what he's talking about.
And another thought: Many times when people do a cost comparison between Nightforce & Sightron, they use the price of the NF NSX as an example, at a cost of around $1980. The benchrest model, 12-42x sells for $1428, and that includes a sunshade & screw-on lens covers, something that is not included, with the cost of the Sightron.
I still hold it against Sightron for including their version of "lens covers" with the S111, 10-50x60mm. A scope of this quality with "lens covers" that give new meaning to "Made in China". Even the Chinese would be embarassed to offer something of such inferior quality. The eyepiece cover on mine would not even fit on the eyepiece, and the objective cover was not much better. A $950 scope with .29 cent "covers".
Sightron could at least offer usable covers for an additional charge, for those of us who use them.
This is a guy who has been whacking g'hogs for the last 40 or so years & "specializing" in the longer distance targets of opportunity, at 750 yards and beyond. He knows what he's talking about.
And another thought: Many times when people do a cost comparison between Nightforce & Sightron, they use the price of the NF NSX as an example, at a cost of around $1980. The benchrest model, 12-42x sells for $1428, and that includes a sunshade & screw-on lens covers, something that is not included, with the cost of the Sightron.
I still hold it against Sightron for including their version of "lens covers" with the S111, 10-50x60mm. A scope of this quality with "lens covers" that give new meaning to "Made in China". Even the Chinese would be embarassed to offer something of such inferior quality. The eyepiece cover on mine would not even fit on the eyepiece, and the objective cover was not much better. A $950 scope with .29 cent "covers".
Sightron could at least offer usable covers for an additional charge, for those of us who use them.
I have long range Leupold side focus scopes, Sightron Slll side focus scopes, Weavers, Burris, etc. I bought my first Nightforce NXS 12-42 NP-2DD last year and it is the best scope I own. Are the March's, Swarovskys or Zeiss's better? They may be but I love my Nightforce. It is rugged, nice tactile turret clicks, clear glass and did I mention I like it?
I looked through a fellow shooter's March that was very impressive. It had a bit of an edge in the optics dept. but not much.
I looked through a fellow shooter's March that was very impressive. It had a bit of an edge in the optics dept. but not much.
mattri: I have a Weaver T-36. Excellent scope for the price, around $410. But I must limit it to 300 yards.
At distances beyond that I cannot see the scoring rings or 6mm bullet holes on the targets.
With my Nightforce's at 42x, and if mirage is not a problem, both can be seen at 600 yards.
The small size of the objective lens on the T-36's compared to the 56mm on the NF is a large factor in the superior optics of the NF. The 60mm objectives on the Sightron's are also a big advantage for them.
I actually find the Weaver T-24's (have 3) to be slightly clearer than the 36x, and that may be because of the lower magnification, with the small diameter objective.
There is a limit on how high the magnification can be for a given objective lens diameter, and 36x with a 40 or 44mm objective is getting closer to those limitations.
At distances beyond that I cannot see the scoring rings or 6mm bullet holes on the targets.
With my Nightforce's at 42x, and if mirage is not a problem, both can be seen at 600 yards.
The small size of the objective lens on the T-36's compared to the 56mm on the NF is a large factor in the superior optics of the NF. The 60mm objectives on the Sightron's are also a big advantage for them.
I actually find the Weaver T-24's (have 3) to be slightly clearer than the 36x, and that may be because of the lower magnification, with the small diameter objective.
There is a limit on how high the magnification can be for a given objective lens diameter, and 36x with a 40 or 44mm objective is getting closer to those limitations.
Interesting information- thanks.
I originaly started out thinking I'd go with a fixed power- the T36,a Leupold or maybe a Sightron. The flexibility of a variable power is what steered me towards the Nightforce in the first place.
I have about 8-10 weeks before the barrel arrives so still have a little time to sort it out.
I originaly started out thinking I'd go with a fixed power- the T36,a Leupold or maybe a Sightron. The flexibility of a variable power is what steered me towards the Nightforce in the first place.
I have about 8-10 weeks before the barrel arrives so still have a little time to sort it out.
mattri: A really big advantage for me with a variable power is the ability to reduce the power ( to 12x with my NF's), quickly find my very small target downrange, with the advantages of the wider field of view at the lower magnification, line up the rifle, front and rear rest, then increase the magnification to whatever I'm able to use, based on mirage & lighting conditions.
That's something you cannot do with any high magnification, fixed power scope.
I have several of the Leupold Competition Series scopes at a fixed 40x, and for that limitation alone, I must limit them to 300 yards maximum. In some of our match's we must fire at multiple targets, at various distances, with time limits included, so the faster you can find your target, the more advantage you have.
With the 42x, depending on conditions, I'm sometimes able to spot my 6mm holes at 500 meters, without having to use my Nikon 82mm spotting scope, another limitation I would have with a scope of lesser magnification, one of the reasons I say "forget about a 8-32x & get the 12-42x".
Whatever scope you decide on, get a good one with an unlimited lifetime warranty, like the NF, Leupold, Sightron, etc. And don't be afraid to buy used, if it's covered by a warranty.
That's something you cannot do with any high magnification, fixed power scope.
I have several of the Leupold Competition Series scopes at a fixed 40x, and for that limitation alone, I must limit them to 300 yards maximum. In some of our match's we must fire at multiple targets, at various distances, with time limits included, so the faster you can find your target, the more advantage you have.
With the 42x, depending on conditions, I'm sometimes able to spot my 6mm holes at 500 meters, without having to use my Nikon 82mm spotting scope, another limitation I would have with a scope of lesser magnification, one of the reasons I say "forget about a 8-32x & get the 12-42x".
Whatever scope you decide on, get a good one with an unlimited lifetime warranty, like the NF, Leupold, Sightron, etc. And don't be afraid to buy used, if it's covered by a warranty.
All this talk about scopes and nary a mention of first focal plane vs. second focal plane. I'm surprised, especially in light of the statement about targets at varying distances in the last reply. Surely you all realize that your POI changes when you zoom in and out with a second focal plane scope? SFP scopes are fine for fixed distances or great big targets, but not much else.
Irgoodger: Tell that to the guy at one of our local match's, fired at distances from 2,3,4 & 500 yards. A perfect score would have been 200. He and another competitor both fired 197, and his last target fired, at 500 yards included 5 shots in a 1" diameter X ring, his final 5 shots of the match.
Oh, by the way, they were both using Nightforce Benchrest 12-42x's.
Once you have your clickups for each distance, who cares about a first or second focal plane?
Can't speak for anyone else, but my "zooming in and out", ( down to 12x or so) is for the purpose of finding a target & lining up the bench equipment only, then the scope is adjusted back up to the usual 42x for the firing of the match.
And as a final thought: How about listing the scopes that are available with first focal plane, so those who may be interested can consider them in their choices.
Oh, by the way, they were both using Nightforce Benchrest 12-42x's.
Once you have your clickups for each distance, who cares about a first or second focal plane?
Can't speak for anyone else, but my "zooming in and out", ( down to 12x or so) is for the purpose of finding a target & lining up the bench equipment only, then the scope is adjusted back up to the usual 42x for the firing of the match.
And as a final thought: How about listing the scopes that are available with first focal plane, so those who may be interested can consider them in their choices.
SFP's from 20 years ago were really bad about POI shift when adjusting the power or focus on the scope. Even the chinese junk imported now is normally better than american made glass of the 60's and 70's. Want to know what "junk" scope is performing? Ask a Field Target airgun shooter what is winning matches.
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.