Testing the Mark 5

[huntnful]

Been on a bit of a scope mission the last six months. Since its the off season, it's time to tinker haha. Just testing out new scopes basically.

I started with a VX6HD 4-24X52. Never did find anything wrong with it honestly. Great glass, tracked and RTZ perfect. Kind of a mushy turret though.

Then I went to ATACR 7-35X56. Everything was legit, except the weight (too top heavy on my light rifle) and the rotating eyepiece with magnification.

Then the 4-32X50 NX8. Good scope, but really not that great honestly. Other than durability, everything was fairly average. No wow factor at any feature.


So onto the Mark 5. 5-25X56 PR1 MOA. At just 1oz more than the NX8 I wanted to give it a shot. The VX6 had the best glass and eyebox out of the other 3 and I was hoping to gain that back as well as potential durability and a more crisp turret. Also been wanting to test out FFP for quick wind holds for mid range hunting.

Honestly, it really does check all the boxes for me so far. Crystal clear glass at all magnifications and easy to get behind. Generous eye box and a FULL scope image. No shadowing around the edges of the glass at all. Parallax is smooth and easy to get a crisp image. The turret is super crisp, much better than the VX6 and on par with the ATACR turret. So far RTZ has been great. I spin it several thousand clicks in between range sessions at home, and also at the range in between shots. I'm confident in it now. I really like the reticle. Basically similar to the NX8, which I liked. I didn't like the ATACR reticle. The VX6 TMOA was my favorite though. The POA is actually void of any crosshair, I liked that the most. It is a BIG scope, despite the 30oz weight. But it gathers a ton of light and maintains a great imagine even at 25X, I believe it needs to be that big to accomplish that. I believe I'll hunt with it this season and then get a 3.6-18X44 for this rifle, and put the 5-25 on my 300 Norma when it's finished. So far so good, I'm really liking the scope. Happy to answer any questions about it, or any of the above scopes also.

 

[AntlerFever]

Nice rig. What’s it sitting on. I have a 300 win mag, on a trued 700 , proof barrel and AG composites stock about to be ready to go any day so looks like it will be similar to your rig in a lot of ways.

trying to decide what scope to put on it long term myself.

 

[BAKPAKR]

Thanks for comparing scopes. You have a nice looking rifle. Benchmark Ibex stock (by AGC)?

 

[huntnful]

Nice rig. What’s it sitting on. I have a 300 win mag, on a trued 700 , proof barrel and AG composites stock about to be ready to go any day so looks like it will be similar to your rig in a lot of ways.

trying to decide what scope to put on it long term myself.

It's a 28 Nosler built by Hells Canyon Armory. Your built should be an awesome on as well!

Thanks for comparing scopes. You have a nice looking rifle. Benchmark Ibex stock (by AGC)?

Yes sir. Absolutely love this stock.

 

[huntnful]

Welcome to the rabbit hole, haha. I had the smaller 3.6-18 Mk5 and thought it was pretty good overall and fairly comparable to the 4-16 ATACR. Each have their pros and cons.

If you’re really looking to find ‘the best’, both Zero Compromise and Tangent Theta are at the tippy top.

Oh man, I've looked at them, trust me lol. I just can't bring myself to get that 3-15 Light Hunter TT. If they had a 4-20 it may be tempting. But twice the money is hard to swallow haha.

 

[huntnful]

Set yourself some notifications on DVOR, the TT315M/H go on sale for just over $3k. In the grand scheme, a $3k optic isn’t that bad. Compared to all the other shooting/hunting costs or compared to other hobbies, you could do way worse….

Good call! I'm gotten some stuff from DVOR, I just hate that it's just optics planet and that place is dicey haha. No $3k isn't crazy honestly. I just don't like the magnification range is all. I'd be in for a 30oz 4-20X though!!

 

[norcal7.3]

Have you gotten any lowlight shooting in? How is the FFP reticle in a low light situation. More specific how does it compare in low light to the VX6??

 

[huntnful]

I just went out and took these photos. It was 7:52pm. 26 minutes after sunset. That elk is 75 yards, but I was looking near and far at dark and light objects and I could kill just about anything on 5X with seeing the reticle. Definitely on 7X.





I know it looks light outside, but it definitely isn't. 26 minutes after legal shooting light here.

 

[huntnful]

Have you gotten any lowlight shooting in? How is the FFP reticle in a low light situation. More specific how does it compare in low light to the VX6??

I'll let you decide by photos. The VX6 reticle is going to be easier to see, because its big at low magnification. But i wouldn't have a problem killing anything with this FFP scope on low magnification at dark.

 

[norcal7.3]

Thanks for the visual!

 

[iseebucks]

Been on a bit of a scope mission the last six months. Since its the off season, it's time to tinker haha. Just testing out new scopes basically.

I started with a VX6HD 4-24X52. Never did find anything wrong with it honestly. Great glass, tracked and RTZ perfect. Kind of a mushy turret though.

Then I went to ATACR 7-35X56. Everything was legit, except the weight (too top heavy on my light rifle) and the rotating eyepiece with magnification.

Then the 4-32X50 NX8. Good scope, but really not that great honestly. Other than durability, everything was fairly average. No wow factor at any feature.


So onto the Mark 5. 5-25X56 PR1 MOA. At just 1oz more than the NX8 I wanted to give it a shot. The VX6 had the best glass and eyebox out of the other 3 and I was hoping to gain that back as well as potential durability and a more crisp turret. Also been wanting to test out FFP for quick wind holds for mid range hunting.

Honestly, it really does check all the boxes for me so far. Crystal clear glass at all magnifications and easy to get behind. Generous eye box and a FULL scope image. No shadowing around the edges of the glass at all. Parallax is smooth and easy to get a crisp image. The turret is super crisp, much better than the VX6 and on par with the ATACR turret. So far RTZ has been great. I spin it several thousand clicks in between range sessions at home, and also at the range in between shots. I'm confident in it now. I really like the reticle. Basically similar to the NX8, which I liked. I didn't like the ATACR reticle. The VX6 TMOA was my favorite though. The POA is actually void of any crosshair, I liked that the most. It is a BIG scope, despite the 30oz weight. But it gathers a ton of light and maintains a great imagine even at 25X, I believe it needs to be that big to accomplish that. I believe I'll hunt with it this season and then get a 3.6-18X44 for this rifle, and put the 5-25 on my 300 Norma when it's finished. So far so good, I'm really liking the scope. Happy to answer any questions about it, or any of the above scopes also.
View attachment 322501

Great review, thank you for providing. I am currently trying to decide if I should purchase the 4-32X50 NX8 or 5-25x56 Mark 5HD for a mountain hunting rifle. Can you please explain in more detail why you were not satisfied with the 4-32X50 NX8? Do you think having 32x is that much of an advantage over the 25x for really long and precise shots? How does glass quality, eye box, overall quality compare between the two? Did you consider the 7-35x56 Mark 5HD?

 

[huntnful]

Great review, thank you for providing. I am currently trying to decide if I should purchase the 4-32X50 NX8 or 5-25x56 Mark 5HD for a mountain hunting rifle. Can you please explain in more detail why you were not satisfied with the 4-32X50 NX8? Do you think having 32x is that much of an advantage over the 25x for really long and precise shots? How does glass quality, eye box, overall quality compare between the two? Did you consider the 7-35x56 Mark 5HD?

Hey dude!

Before I make the comparison, you need to know that the NX8 is a legit scope and you will not be disappointed if you decide to get it. I was not unsatisfied with it, I just wasn't blown away by it. If that makes sense? lol

Above 25X you can visible watch the image get darker and crappier on the NX8 as you increase magnification. It's a much better scope at around 25X than 32X. However definitely still usable at 32X.

To compare them, the eyebox is definitely better on the Mark 5. That glass and clarity is definitely better on the Mark 5. I like the turret more on the Mark 5 (locking and more tactile feeling). Only time will tell durability, but so far the Mark 5 is legit as far as tracking and Return to Zero. I also love that I can get the Mark 5 in non illuminated.

The downside. It's a big scope. 35mm main tube, 56mm objective and it's decently long as well. But i believe the compactness of the NX8 is why it's lacking so much in optics and forgiveness. The Mark 5 is 1oz heavier.

I've actually switched to a 3.6-18X44 Mark 5 on my 28 nosler and saving the 5-25 for my bigger Norma once it's done being built. The 3.6-18 is still a legit 1000 yard scope and I'm definitely happy with it!

 

[AntlerFever]

Can you tell if the 35 mm tube on the 3.6-18 makes up for the loss of light transmission, field of view from the 44 mm obj when compared to a 30 mm tube/50 mm obj?

 

[huntnful]

Can you tell if the 35 mm tube on the 3.6-18 makes up for the loss of light transmission, field of view from the 44 mm obj when compared to a 30 mm tube/50 mm obj?

From everything I've seen and read, the tube diameter has zero effect on actual light transmission. That is strictly and objective size to magnification relationship. So 18X out of a 44mm Objective is a 2.44 exit pupil. 18X out of a 50mm is 2.77 exit pupil.

With that said, with the Mark 5 3.6-18X44, at a magnification of 18X, I can shoot well before and after legal shooting light with how clear and bright the image is.

 

[iseebucks]

Hey dude!

Before I make the comparison, you need to know that the NX8 is a legit scope and you will not be disappointed if you decide to get it. I was not unsatisfied with it, I just wasn't blown away by it. If that makes sense? lol

Above 25X you can visible watch the image get darker and crappier on the NX8 as you increase magnification. It's a much better scope at around 25X than 32X. However definitely still usable at 32X.

To compare them, the eyebox is definitely better on the Mark 5. That glass and clarity is definitely better on the Mark 5. I like the turret more on the Mark 5 (locking and more tactile feeling). Only time will tell durability, but so far the Mark 5 is legit as far as tracking and Return to Zero. I also love that I can get the Mark 5 in non illuminated.

The downside. It's a big scope. 35mm main tube, 56mm objective and it's decently long as well. But i believe the compactness of the NX8 is why it's lacking so much in optics and forgiveness. The Mark 5 is 1oz heavier.

I've actually switched to a 3.6-18X44 Mark 5 on my 28 nosler and saving the 5-25 for my bigger Norma once it's done being built. The 3.6-18 is still a legit 1000 yard scope and I'm definitely happy with it!

Thank you, this helps a lot and I appreciate you taking the time to share your experiences with these scopes.

 

[wind gypsy]

From everything I've seen and read, the tube diameter has zero effect on actual light transmission. That is strictly and objective size to magnification relationship. So 18X out of a 44mm Objective is a 2.44 exit pupil. 18X out of a 50mm is 2.77 exit pupil.

With that said, with the Mark 5 3.6-18X44, at a magnification of 18X, I can shoot well before and after legal shooting light with how clear and bright the image is.

Agreed on the tube diameter not being the driver for light transmission. It just allows more space for things inside the scope which could in theory allow components to fit that result in higher light transmission.

I think there's some nuance to the objective to magnification relationship too. I've heard high magnification range scopes can have compromises on the exit pupil size. A look at the NX8 specs indicate at max power the calculation works but at minimum the exit pupil is way smaller than that calc would show. Maybe it only applies to max magnification?

Edit to add: Light transmission and exit pupil are different concepts.

 

[Benzy2]

Almost looks brighter through the scope than in the background.

 

[AntlerFever]

Agreed on the tube diameter not being the driver for light transmission. It just allows more space for things inside the scope which could in theory allow components to fit that result in higher light transmission.

I think there's some nuance to the objective to magnification relationship too. I've heard high magnification range scopes can have compromises on the exit pupil size. A look at the NX8 specs indicate at max power the calculation works but at minimum the exit pupil is way smaller than that calc would show. Maybe it only applies to max magnification?

this is good insight.

 

[Kad000]

I am looking into this scope vs the Vx6hd. Do you still like the mark 5 over the vx6hd?

 

[huntnful]

I am looking into this scope vs the Vx6hd. Do you still like the mark 5 over the vx6hd?

Yes I do for sure. The Mark 5 is super nice, it is just a little heavier than the VX6HD. I ended up going with the 3.6-18 for the season, and it's been great so far!!