NF SHV 4-14x50 f1 vs SWFA 3-15x42 gen 2

[Dobermann]

I’m genuinely asking here - How would the 3x9 be better? They’re the same base mag, tube and objective diameter so I just assumed not much of a difference.

In addition to the other answers above, isn't the 3-9 in the SS series, and has better glass than the 3-15?

 

[Formidilosus]

In addition to the other answers above, isn't the 3-9 in the SS series, and has better glass than the 3-15?

HD series, yes. As far as the glass- the Gen 2 is so close almost no one could actually tell which is which on 9x.

 

[HandgunHTR]

While I didn't have a Gen2, I did have two of the SWFA 3-15 and two NF SHV 4-14 F1 (MIL). I ended up selling off both of the SWFA scopes. Not because they didn't work, or were not reliable. They are bomb-proof, or at least HandgunHTR-proof, which is essentially the same due to the stupid crap I sometimes do. What clinched it for me was the eye-box and focus. As my eyes get worse with age, I have to adjust my focus occasionally, and I noticed that as I adjusted the focus on the SWFA scopes, the eyebox was reduced at a pretty significant rate. So much so, that I ended up with a pretty large dark ring around the image, regardless of the positioning of my head or moving the scope in the rings to adjust eye relief. Now, this could just be an anomoly due to my specific eye sight, but it was such that I didn't like using the scope any more.
BTW, I don't have that issue with the NF, Maven, Tract, Meopta, or Bushnell scopes I currently have.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I will be making this decision soon as well. Is the NF's image quality noticeably better than the SWFA? I'm also very curious which one has a better eyebox as that's a huge deal to me.

 

[8nbait]

Just due to size and weight I choose the SWFA, and I like the reticle better also.
Glass, reliability and general function to me is a wash.