NX8 vs NXS - glass quality

[Johnc427]

For those of you that have had both, I am considering a NXS 3.5-15x50 for a lightweight 300 WSM I’m building. I have an NX8 2.5-20 F2 on a 6 Dasher target rifle and to be quite honest, I’m not a huge fan of the glass quality and eye box. So much so, I don’t think I’d ever run it on a hunting rig.

I’ve never looked through an NXS, so my question is how does the glass quality (most importantly), parallax, eye box, etc compare to that of a NX8? Thanks all

 

[InkedElkSlayer]

All of mine are on hunting rifles, not bench or varmit rifles…
I have 2 NXS 5.5x22x56s. 1 with MOAR with the velocity reticle and 1 with a normal MOAR-T. I prefer the heavier reticle for sure. The glass quality is excellent and the eye relief is more forgiving.
I have 2 NX8 2.5x20s. 1 F1 on my wife’s 300 and 1 F2 on a tiny, ultralight, suppressed 6.5. Again, for HUNTING, I prefer the F2 and the heavier reticle.
I know a lot of people comment on the eye relief of the NX8. I believe it’s more noticeable at the range at higher power. When I’m packing my rifle hunting, it’s around 4-5.5 power. I don’t notice the eye relief being finicky. Most of the time that we shoot longer and dial, we’re only going up to 10-16 power.
Bottom line is a lot of the hunting we're doing is in timber, or gloomy overcast days, with the chance of shooting cross canyon. I like the heavier F2 reticle. The NXS is significantly longer and a little heavier. Ultimately it’s a personal preference, but I plan to build a 300 that resembles my little 6.5… My plan is to go with the NX8 2.5x20 with the F2.
All that said… from a marketing standpoint, the NX8 drove the cost of the NXS down. If the eye relief bothers you, the 3.5x15 may be the way to go and you can get them for a decent price. You won’t be disappointed in the glass quality. But I do think there’s a big difference between a target rifle on 20 power and a hunting setup when it comes to eye relief.
Not sure if that’ll help or not?

 

[Johnc427]

Yes that definitely helps. I think I’m gonna try one. My main concern was glass quality and that answers. Also having a better eye relief helps too. Thanks for your reply

 

[CCooper]

I started with a 5.5x22 NXS , bought a NX8 4-32 F2 for my next build. The NX8 didn't last long. I did not care for the reticle at all and the eye relief was not friendly for me at higher powers. In addition, the parallax adjustment was finicky IMO. Glass was very comparable between the NXS and NX8 until you dialed the power up to max on the NX8 which wasn't great. I promptly traded it for another NXS 5.5x22. My last NXS I purchased was a 3-15 and I really like it as well as a hunting scope- glass is good enough for me. I do however miss the extra magnification at the range when shooting groups. I prefer the standard MOAR reticle for hunting purposes.

 

[justin davis]

I’d be curious to hear More input

 

[PredatorSlayer]

I have an NX8 4-32x50 F2 and a NXS 5.5-22x56.

Glass and magnification ring go to the NX8. Eye box and paralax adjustment go to the NXS.

Reticle is personal preference, I like both. NX8 has capped windage, NXS is exposed, another personal preference thing.

My NXS is on a 6mm creedmoor that I shoot quite a bit. The NX8 is on a 6.5 PRC I don’t shoot as much.

 

[Oilcan]

For you guys running the NX8 did you have any problems mounting the scopes to get your proper eye relief. I have been reading about some people having issues with the shorter scope, even having to modify the rail.

 

[SDHNTR]

I’ve had both the NXS 3-15 and the NX8 2.5-20

I still own several NXS 3-15’s. The NX8 grew legs. The glass quality is the same, but the NXS is much more user friendly. More eye box and relief, just easier to use.

 

[Pronghunter]

I guess Im the odd ball. No issues whatsoever with NX8 eyebox. I’ve noticed those who don’t shoot a lot seem to have issues with the eye box. And the glass in the NX8 is considerably better than any of my NXS. I sent all my NXS out the door and run the NX8 almost exclusively on all my hunting rigs. Both 2nd and 1st FP

 

[Kurts86]

I have a 2.5-20 NX8 and a 2.5-10x42 NXS and I can’t tell a difference in glass quality but the illumination is much better on the NX8. That’s the most notable difference. Neither has great eye relief and the eye box for me is pretty comparable at the same magnification.

If you are getting a 50mm scope I’d get the NX8 over the NXS to get capped windage and better illumination. I like the NXS series just for the 42mm objective and weight alone.

 

[SDHNTR]

If they would only make an NX4 or 5 in that same package, they would solve so many issues and sell boatloads. Much better illumination than the NXS, lighter and without the finicky nature of the NX8. Or, just offer the ATACR series in a 30 mil tube!

 

[PredatorSlayer]

The NXS is just a badass proven scope though. I’ll never forget the video NF put out of them freezing an NXS, shooting it with a shotgun, then pounding some nails with it, remounting and it holding zero.

I don’t really use illumination that much, and I set it on the nxs for low shooting light conditions.

 

[rlp10ml]

I'm not a professional by any means. A couple of years ago I had an NF SHV 5-20x56 and wanted to step up to the NXS. I emailed NF about the differences between the 2, especially the glass. Their reply was beside the obvious internal differences, the NXS and the SHV shared the same glass. I wasn't having any issues with the SHV, so I did not get the NXS. Last year however I did replace the SHV with a NX8 2.5-20x50. To my eyes, there was a big difference in the glass quality between the SHV and the NX8, the NX8 being much better (To me). I have it mounted on a short action Rem with a Seekins rail with Med. NF Rings. Being a little short in front of the turrets I did have to shorten the front of the rail so the objective would not hit the rail. I removed 2 of the front slots. As far as the eye box being finicky, only on high power it is a tiny bit touchy for me, but it has not bothered me to want to get rid of it.

 

[Lawnboi]

The nx8 can be a tough scope to set up properly as well. Diopter and parralax both finicky. And it dosnt have the yardage cheat sheet on the parralax knob you need to know what you’re actually looking for.

I think that is where many of the negative reviews come from personally.

 

[SDHNTR]

And it dosnt have the yardage cheat sheet on the parralax knob you need to know what you’re actually looking for.

Nor does the NXS.

 

[brianp]

For what it's worth, I was speaking to a NightForce rep just earlier this week and this is an exact quote from his Email:

"The NX8 has the same build/construction standards as the NXS and ATACR models, so it’s very capable of hard use."

I know your talking about glass quality here, but I think most people associates higher tier model with more durable. I know I did.

 

[EddieNel]

Just to throw this in the mix. What about the Atacr glass quality vs the NXS and NX8? Is it worth the upgrade in price? Also what about eye relief? Might be worth the poster waiting a little and upgrading to the Atacr.

 

[smokinbobf4]

I am another who has multiple nx8 4-32’s. Had a nxs before. I think the glass is a bit better in the nx8. The parallax is a bit more finicky but it doesn’t hinder me at all. I also feel like the eye box is fine for me. Get close to the correct shooting position and where you set up the scope and all is well. I have had no issues with it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nksmfamjp]

The NX8 has the same build/construction standards as the NXS and ATACR models

I would be interested in a list of what that means specifically.

Often that means their “checkout” process is the same.

Specs are adjusted within the design to make the design hit its requirements, then the processes get built from the control points dictated by the design. Then exclusive process plans often go on separate lines to match the equipment and personal required to get it built right.

These “checkout” processes get built pretty common across models to keep people from making mistakes. So you could build 3 models of scopes. 1 handles 1000 g’s of recoil, 2000 g’s of recoil or 3000 g’s. You could have all tested at 1000 g’s, have an employee turn a switch, have a model type bar code on the optic…..i would guess most would choose option #1 and then run “contract“ scopes down a 3000 g line for extra cost to the contract…..aka the $500 hammer.

 

[SDHNTR]

For what it's worth, I was speaking to a NightForce rep just earlier this week and this is an exact quote from his Email:

"The NX8 has the same build/construction standards as the NXS and ATACR models, so it’s very capable of hard use."

I know your talking about glass quality here, but I think most people associates higher tier model with more durable. I know I did.

Not me. With any scope manufacturer, I expect mostly the same level of reliability across the line. At least to a standard. If it’s not reliable, it’s not worth building, or owning. If I happen to be paying more money, I then expect better glass and more desirable features. That’s what should cost more money. Not reliability. You shouldn’t have to pay more to get something that works the way it should.

My Toyota isn’t as fancy or comfortable as my wife’s Lexus, but I expect it to do the same job.