I agree. It's nice to see a scope thread NOT get ugly, as they so often do.
I have Leupold and Nightforce scopes,, I like them both for their intended purpose. They are the two dominant brand scopes on the NRA prone 1K lines in my area,,, that's gotta say something... When I get off my lazy arse and send the NXS in to be checked out I'm sure it'll come back 100%.
I will say that the Nightforce scopes have the best illuminated reticle I've ever seen. The only thing I don't like about it is you need a small screw driver to change the reticle intensity,, but it's a small price to pay for the way they package the illumination switch and the quality and uniformity of the entire reticle being lit. Leupolds lit reticle, as well as S&B's really turns me off. I hate the 4th turret and only having the center crosshairs lit. Also, the new new S&B's lit reticle turret obstructs the view of the parallax while the shooter is in position. They should both pay NF to use the integrated design that they have for the NXS's.
The R2 reticle deserves it's own thread. This is info that I've not ever seen bofore,, and it would be nice to access it by itself. If more shooters knew about the reticles intended purpose and the ballistic details required to make it work correctly,, the R2 may have more appeal to the common guy.
The insight you've shared regarding this reticle is nothing short of outstanding, for obvious reasons. Thank you for sharing.
I do have a question regarding one of your posts though. You wrote "2) NVD integration: A gen 4 Itt unit clamps on the occular lens allowing you to adjust your reticle brightness and passively range, avoiding detection risk of using a rangefinder at night. This also eliminates poi shift when switching to NV conditions."
Can't this be done using the monoloc system and the PVS 14 with any scope that allows you to focus the reticle by rotating the ocular? Or using the Badger or DD Ross upper ring and mounting a Simrad? Oh,, and doesn't the lit reticle get picked up by those using NOD's for detection?
Yeah,, I wasn't thinking when I listed the SIMRAD,, Can't add all those lenes in different planes and not have a POI shift, my CRS kicking in there.
I was also mulling over the lit reticle with the PVS 14's... When in focus, the reticle couldn't be turned up bright or it would white out the Tube,,, it must be just barely visible,, almost not visible to the human eye I'd think. Something the NXS allows by not having click adjustments for the intensity of the light,,, That is clever isn't it... [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] The light from the NOD would be covered by the veil I guess, and there's a much smaller objective to hide. Ohh, the joy of being well funded.....
I'd think with the reticle intensity set that low,, Jack lighting or LCMS would be a much bigger threat to the operator. Not something most LRH's need to worry about,, YET [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] but them Elk get smarter every year...
I am also surprised (being the web challenged sort that I am) that I don't see major discussions on the wind and how it interacts with the laws on gyro-precession.
Man,, I could write a book on how the wind kicks my ass, [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img] , no need to hash that out here,, LOL....
All kidding aside,, if I could hammer down my wind call shooting 1K would be easy. The newer calibers, coupled with the quality of the glass these days give the shooter every advantage.
It's nice being able to see the scoreing rings clearly at 1K,, and makes wind holds much easier for me,, something I can easily do with the 15X of my NXS but have trouble with using a 10X Leupold,, Apples to Oranges,, but the scores prove the NXS's power range is better suited in my case. I'd have liked to have slung up in Speedbumps rifle to see how the Benchrest NF looked cranked up,, but the noise it makes scares me off the firing line [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]
1K is still as far as I have to shoot,, and I'm happy to have it. You guys that have opportunity get 2500+ yard shots,,, I hope you know how lucky you are.
Here's a question for you that have the luxury of having Leupold LR and NightForce NXS (or Hybrid or Benchrest) scopes available to look at side-by-side, or have looked at enough to be able to say anyway:
What about eye-relief?
I had two Leupold LR scopes, a 6.5-20 w/ a target dot and a 8.5-25 w/ duplex, and sold the both of them to put towards a NXS. Life being what it is, I ended up having to make due for the time being w/ a Sightron 6-24x [img]images/icons/frown.gif[/img]
The reasons I was unhappy w/ the Leupolds at the time was a) the dot reticle was driving me absolutely batty. Half the time I couldn't see the thing for more than 5 seconds before it faded out. I've used other dot reticles before and since, but that one did not do my eyes any favors. Could have just had the reticle changed, but for b), which was that the scopes were on field guns, i.e. LR varmint guns that still fall in the 'walking' category, more due to who I hunt w/ rather than me wanting the exercise. W/ the scopes mounted on these guns, that I had to be able to use from prone, sitting, whatever, the wide range of eye relief btwn min and max magnification cause some serious problems w/ the fit of the rifle to me. At one end, I was crawling up the stock, and even had the scope mounted all the way forward in extended rings. At the other end, I was having to hold the stock about 3/4" from my shoulder, and trying to shoot accurately at that point was a lost cause.
The brief time I'd spent behind various NF scopes (12-42x BR, 2 5.5-22x NXS's), mostly on friends .50 BMG rifles, seemed to show that the field of view was crisper and 'flatter', and the eye relief hardly changed at all from min to max power.
As has been mentioned above, a lot of this is highly subject to individual perceptions/preferences, individual scope samples, etc. I'm curious if anyone else has anything to say about their views/opinions on the subject of the eye relief of the Leupold LRs vs the NightForce BR/NXSs.