Maven, Leupold, Trijicon, NF

[Nards444]

Looking for my first high end scope. Want to keep it to these 4 brands, been down a ton of rabbit holes already but have it narrowed down. I would consider myself a mid range shooter in the 300-500 range, with longest take on a deer being 700. So 7-800 yards is important. This is an out west gun where I have never shot anything under 300yds. Light properties are important, along with clarity and durability. We do a lot of turret work so that important.

These are all the same price relatively, with the Maven on the low end and the NF on the higher end.

Maven RS.5 maybe RS.3, 4-24x50
Trijicon Tenmile HX 5-25x50
Leupold VX5HD 4-20x52
NF NX8 4-32x50

Maven and Trijicon both have a 56mm reticle that looks attractive as well.

Sort of hesitant on boutique brands like Maven, only been around 10 years, long term warranty claims. NF almost falls into that, as well as being heavier and people not liking the reticle. Ive read some of the zero issues with Leupold, but dont know how much stock to put into it. The one brand I have not any rumor mill stuff from is trijicon

 

[ResearchinStuff]

Rifle Scope Field Evaluations

rokslide.com

Maven rs 1.2
Tenmile 3-18
Nightforce nx8 4-32 f1

 

[MThuntr]

As mentioned on another forum, I'd drop down in zoom ranges. Being zoomed way in on targets is ok but it's easy to lose sight of the target at the shot and then can be hard to find when you're at 25x. I'd go with the 2.5x-15 Maven or a 3-18 Tenmile HX

 

[stayzeroed]

Is turret work the dialing of your DOPE instead of holdover? Ensure you have some sort of ability to 'lock' in your zero or have a return to zero if the windage/elevation are not capped. If you are in the price range of the NX8, then I would highly consider going with the 2.5-20. As @MThuntr mentioned, starting at a higher magnification does limit your ability to maintain sight picture through recoil when shooting off of less than ideal supports. Additionally, you my find it harder to locate your target with the immediate 4x, especially with a busy background of trees, etc.

 

[Nards444]

Is turret work the dialing of your DOPE instead of holdover? Ensure you have some sort of ability to 'lock' in your zero or have a return to zero if the windage/elevation are not capped. If you are in the price range of the NX8, then I would highly consider going with the 2.5-20. As @MThuntr mentioned, starting at a higher magnification does limit your ability to maintain sight picture through recoil when shooting off of less than ideal supports. Additionally, you my find it harder to locate your target with the immediate 4x, especially with a busy background of trees, etc.

Yes to get dope. All the ones Im looking at have some form of a zero stop

 

[RockAndSage]

As mentioned on another forum, I'd drop down in zoom ranges. Being zoomed way in on targets is ok but it's easy to lose sight of the target at the shot and then can be hard to find when you're at 25x. I'd go with the 2.5x-15 Maven or a 3-18 Tenmile HX

^^^ What he said.

While those scopes you mention are each pretty cool pieces of equipment - here are a couple of things to consider:

1) Anything above 15-18x, and you're almost certainly going to lose the animal in your scope when you shoot. Almost no animal goes down on first shot if you're doing a heart/lung shot.

2) The scopes going way above 18x have become the rage largely because of PRS games. Those go on very heavy rifles, mostly shooting light-recoiling cartridges, on targets that didn't evolve to blend into the environment. In that context, shooters actually get use and value out of higher top-end magnification. PRS isn't field realities, however, where it's easy to lose an animal in your scope with recoil, darkness, etc.

3) Those PRS scopes are chonky, heavy instruments. More mag, especially larger mag ranges, generally means heavier scopes. The places were higher magnification would theoretically help are also the same places (ie, western big game hunting) where you're going to be hauling your gun and gear the greatest distances and altitude gains/loses. Light is good, at least to the point where it becomes less reliable.

4) I have very expensive taste in glass, having been quite a fan of Swarovskis. But new information and perspective changes minds. The next hunting scope I'll be giving a shot is the Maven RS 1.2. That might say something. I don't expect it to have as good of glass or low-light capability of my Swarovskis, but at this point, subject to personal validation later on, it may be one of the most optimal hunting scopes out there.

 

[JohnJohnson]

The scopes going way above 18x have become the rage largely because of PRS games.

To some extent, yes. But not because PRS shooters use magnification above 20 for matches.

Those go on very heavy rifles, mostly shooting light-recoiling cartridges, on targets that didn't evolve to blend into the environment.

Agreed but any scope commonly used in PRS has the image quality to find game animals with. And likely better image quality than almost any hunting scope outside of a Minox ZP5 or high end Swarovski, though ZCO/TT would rival/beat those too. I don't think TT, ZCO, NF ATACRs, Vortex R3, Kahles, or I guess Leupold MK5s give up anything to dedicated hunting scopes when it comes to image quality. What they give up is weight, which you mentioned.

In that context, shooters actually get use and value out of higher top-end magnification.

They get the value but not in that context. PRS shooters shoot matches somewhere between 12-18 power depending on the individual stages, normally below 15 power. High magnification is something they'll use to shoot groups for zeroing but that's about it. The high max magnification is something they like because the brightness/eyebox/image quality on lower magnification ranges (which they shoot matches in) is better. A 3-15x56 scope will not be as forgiving or look as nice on 15 power as a 7-35x56 scope on 15 power.

 

[Nards444]

^^^ What he said.

While those scopes you mention are each pretty cool pieces of equipment - here are a couple of things to consider:

1) Anything above 15-18x, and you're almost certainly going to lose the animal in your scope when you shoot. Almost no animal goes down on first shot if you're doing a heart/lung shot.

2) The scopes going way above 18x have become the rage largely because of PRS games. Those go on very heavy rifles, mostly shooting light-recoiling cartridges, on targets that didn't evolve to blend into the environment. In that context, shooters actually get use and value out of higher top-end magnification. PRS isn't field realities, however, where it's easy to lose an animal in your scope with recoil, darkness, etc.

3) Those PRS scopes are chonky, heavy instruments. More mag, especially larger mag ranges, generally means heavier scopes. The places were higher magnification would theoretically help are also the same places (ie, western big game hunting) where you're going to be hauling your gun and gear the greatest distances and altitude gains/loses. Light is good, at least to the point where it becomes less reliable.

4) I have very expensive taste in glass, having been quite a fan of Swarovskis. But new information and perspective changes minds. The next hunting scope I'll be giving a shot is the Maven RS 1.2. That might say something. I don't expect it to have as good of glass or low-light capability of my Swarovskis, but at this point, subject to personal validation later on, it may be one of the most optimal hunting scopes out there.

Thanks for the input Im actually debating the Trijicon Tenmile 4.5-30x56. Kind of has the best of both worlds as it drops down to 4.5 and goes up to 30 vs a 5-25 or 6-24.

We western hunt rolling prairie and draws, and my current scope is a 6-24 and actually like the 6 power up front as it requires no magnification change for up close.

Also getting the last ounce of light out there is very important to 50mm is must or larger

Ive never shot a deer under 300yds out there, our hunt style is private property where we know all the spots, its drive or walk around to a spot, sit and glass and wait and or move on. In theory we could jump something up close, but its never really happened, the terrain is more a spot and stalk and get as close as you can, its not really stalk and be surprised or even sit and be surprised, where we are you dont really sneak up on deer and they cant sneak up on you. My first scope out there was a 3-15 or 3-12 and upgraded immediately as I was always finding myself adjust to somewhere around 5 to 6 power.

However we do some walking and ounces add up to pounds, and the nightforce kind of a detriment to that.

This set up im going for is just one gun that is used for a specific purpose out west. For hardwoods I have your typical 3 power stuff and have another set up for short mid range.

 

[270quest]

S&B 5-25-X56 pmII

 

[Nards444]

To some extent, yes. But not because PRS shooters use magnification above 20 for matches.

Agreed but any scope commonly used in PRS has the image quality to find game animals with. And likely better image quality than almost any hunting scope outside of a Minox ZP5 or high end Swarovski, though ZCO/TT would rival/beat those too. I don't think TT, ZCO, NF ATACRs, Vortex R3, Kahles, or I guess Leupold MK5s give up anything to dedicated hunting scopes when it comes to image quality. What they give up is weight, which you mentioned.

They get the value but not in that context. PRS shooters shoot matches somewhere between 12-18 power depending on the individual stages, normally below 15 power. High magnification is something they'll use to shoot groups for zeroing but that's about it. The high max magnification is something they like because the brightness/eyebox/image quality on lower magnification ranges (which they shoot matches in) is better. A 3-15x56 scope will not be as forgiving or look as nice on 15 power as a 7-35x56 scope on 15 power.

I dont know what PRS is . My normal hunt is hardwoods and clearings and I get the overpower stuff. However like I said above being able to see, is great out west. And this isnt a knock on anybody, but think some of the anxiety over high power is guys used to shooting 3x9 type stuff forever and really havent used some of the newer stuff.

Hunting has changed for some fof us younger guys. I know i grew up with grandfathers and friends where it was the 30-30 with iron sights or little tasco strapped to the side, climb into the tree stand and wait for a deer. Nothing wrong with that, I still do it. However many brands now offer out of the box near custom guns at a good price, along with ammo manufactures having more accurate rounds, and even budget glass being some very descent stuff even compared to high end stuff from 30 years ago.

All this makes 300yd shots lay ups and quite easy, at least where I grew up hunting these type of shots were unheard of.

 

[stayzeroed]

I dont know what PRS is . My normal hunt is hardwoods and clearings and I get the overpower stuff. However like I said above being able to see, is great out west. And this isnt a knock on anybody, but think some of the anxiety over high power is guys used to shooting 3x9 type stuff forever and really havent used some of the newer stuff.

Hunting has changed for some fof us younger guys. I know i grew up with grandfathers and friends where it was the 30-30 with iron sights or little tasco strapped to the side, climb into the tree stand and wait for a deer. Nothing wrong with that, I still do it. However many brands now offer out of the box near custom guns at a good price, along with ammo manufactures having more accurate rounds, and even budget glass being some very descent stuff even compared to high end stuff from 30 years ago.

All this makes 300yd shots lay ups and quite easy, at least where I grew up hunting these type of shots were unheard of.

Yeah, that's not it at all. I have every power optic available to me at a moments notice. From my experience in the field and at rifle matches, I tell you that having a lower starting power variable optic is preferred when hunting out west. The only time I have ever used the maximum magnification on my optics while in the field, is when I want to check something out that is quite a distance away, that my binoculars cannot quite pick up adequately enough.

There are plenty of guys on here that are "old" and use new technology.

But I digress. You asked for some advice, it was provided. Do with it what you will. If all your looking for is a vote for one of the four optics you mentioned, start a poll.

 

[wapitibob]

I’ve had three of those scopes and currently use the 25x tenmile HX. Magnification is a non-issue.

 

[RockAndSage]

To some extent, yes. But not because PRS shooters use magnification above 20 for matches.

Agreed but any scope commonly used in PRS has the image quality to find game animals with. And likely better image quality than almost any hunting scope outside of a Minox ZP5 or high end Swarovski, though ZCO/TT would rival/beat those too. I don't think TT, ZCO, NF ATACRs, Vortex R3, Kahles, or I guess Leupold MK5s give up anything to dedicated hunting scopes when it comes to image quality. What they give up is weight, which you mentioned.

They get the value but not in that context. PRS shooters shoot matches somewhere between 12-18 power depending on the individual stages, normally below 15 power. High magnification is something they'll use to shoot groups for zeroing but that's about it. The high max magnification is something they like because the brightness/eyebox/image quality on lower magnification ranges (which they shoot matches in) is better. A 3-15x56 scope will not be as forgiving or look as nice on 15 power as a 7-35x56 scope on 15 power.

That was both interesting and informative, thanks for adding those details. And I agree, I'm not sure there are many "hunting scopes" that have image quality matching Tangent Theta, ZCO, etc, at all. Especially if you qualify hunting scope to also mean sufficiently rugged to maintain zero after drops.

 

[RockAndSage]

Thanks for the input Im actually debating the Trijicon Tenmile 4.5-30x56. Kind of has the best of both worlds as it drops down to 4.5 and goes up to 30 vs a 5-25 or 6-24.

We western hunt rolling prairie and draws, and my current scope is a 6-24 and actually like the 6 power up front as it requires no magnification change for up close.

Also getting the last ounce of light out there is very important to 50mm is must or larger

Ive never shot a deer under 300yds out there, our hunt style is private property where we know all the spots, its drive or walk around to a spot, sit and glass and wait and or move on. In theory we could jump something up close, but its never really happened, the terrain is more a spot and stalk and get as close as you can, its not really stalk and be surprised or even sit and be surprised, where we are you dont really sneak up on deer and they cant sneak up on you. My first scope out there was a 3-15 or 3-12 and upgraded immediately as I was always finding myself adjust to somewhere around 5 to 6 power.

However we do some walking and ounces add up to pounds, and the nightforce kind of a detriment to that.

This set up im going for is just one gun that is used for a specific purpose out west. For hardwoods I have your typical 3 power stuff and have another set up for short mid range.

With those use-case parameters, it sounds like the scopes you first mentioned were excellent selections then. The only thing I'd really add in that case, is that in the drop tests mentioned above, Leupold, unfortunately, seems to have a very bad reputation in maintaining zero. Which is sad and frustrating, because they've got great form-factor, and the VX5s and VX6s I've experienced were excellent in low-light.

 

[Nards444]

Throw a wrench in things. How about a Vortex Razor HD LHT.

 

[JohnJohnson]

However like I said above being able to see, is great out west. And this isnt a knock on anybody, but think some of the anxiety over high power is guys used to shooting 3x9 type stuff forever and really havent used some of the newer stuff.

No, that's not it at all. When you shoot, your gun moves from recoil. For larger cartridges it moves more and in less stable positions (non-prone) it moves more as well. In order for you to be able to see where your bullet goes, you need to be on a low enough power that the animal is still in your scope during that process. Unless you're in a good prone position, you will probably not be able to do that above about 14 power. Hell, those PRS (Precision Rifle Series) guys he mentioned spend a whole match on 12-18 power while shooting out to distances normally in the 500-1100 yard range. They do that for image quality and field of view reasons. With 20-26 pound rifles chambered in small 6mm cartridges.

Hunting has changed for some fof us younger guys. I know i grew up with grandfathers and friends where it was the 30-30 with iron sights or little tasco strapped to the side, climb into the tree stand and wait for a deer. Nothing wrong with that, I still do it. However many brands now offer out of the box near custom guns at a good price, along with ammo manufactures having more accurate rounds, and even budget glass being some very descent stuff even compared to high end stuff from 30 years ago.

I'm almost comically the wrong audience for this comment, man.

 

[Nards444]

only time I have ever used the maximum magnification on my optics while in the field, is when I want to check something out that is quite a distance away, that my binoculars cannot quite pick up adequately enough.

This is why I like it. I really appreciate the input honestly. But for me Ive always found to be between 4 and 6 power to starters nothing less.

 

[wapitibob]

If you want a Leupold, get the new Mark 4hd. I have multiple friends using the Vortex LHT and they like it but it felt cheap to me. The Tenmile HX is the best of all worlds to me. Not quite the eyebox of the Mark 4 but way better than the NX8.

 

[Macintosh]

I think the magnification needs to get matched to the recoil. If you dont need less than 5-6x becasue you only hunt in the wide open, fine--but you dont need even 15-18x to make a 700 yard shot. But even at 15-18x if you have a light rifle that recoils, its really hard to keep an animal in view for a follow up or to see where it went, even at 300-400 yards. Sounds like extremely open terrain, most of the places I've hunted in the west shorter shots hapen routinely (mostly) and even a long shot there's often trees and draws and woodlines that a hit animal makes a beeline for. That field of view allows for a better follow up shot or just able to see an animals reaction and where it went. You can get away with higher magnification (regardless of whether that's 15x or 25x) in a 15-25 pound PRS rifle shooting a light-recoiling cartridge, not so much in an 8.5lb-10lb 300 winmag or similar, if that's the direction you're going. To me, the more recoil, the less magnification I want. If you're going with a 6creed or another lower recoiling catridge, or a much heavier rifle (12-15lb and braked/suppressed), maybe a little extra magnification will hurt you less. You can certainly use the mid-range of magnification, you just cannot get away from the weight on a decent +/- 25-30x scope.
Of the ones mentioned specifically by the OP I'd be looking at Trijicon or Nightforce. I personally dont care for the reticles on the tenmile or any of the NF scopes though. Maybe in the specific terrain and situation you are talking about those are fine or even good, although would not be my choice for a general purpose longer-range-capable hunting rifle.

Anyway, that's my thoughts from a fellow newer to longer range hunter and shooter after 6 or 7 years into that aspect of things. The things I thought I wanted going into it were really for target games and didnt help--probably even hurt--my hunting use.