Compared my PST to a NF.

Discussion in 'Long Range Scopes and Other Optics' started by joseph, Apr 6, 2011.

  1. joseph

    joseph Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,238
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Don't laugh. I do need to say the new NF = ?x to 20x by 50mm which was at the range today the focus was not adjusted perfectly for my eyes. The NF reticule was much thinner than my 6-24x50mm PST FFP MOA scope, but ( maybe because the NF was not in perfect focus it was not as clear ) as my PST. In fact the PST seemed much brighter then the NF. Even one of the other shooters that had a NF BR scope made a comment of how clear my scope was.

    This was the first time I was able to compare mine to a NF. This really surprised me.

    joseph
     
  2. MTBULLET

    MTBULLET Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,058
    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    now your gonna start a "post" battle !
    many folks (myself included) had bought into the NF hype "it costs so much because it's the best" , but I discovered that many,many other optics are better in some ways, equal in all, to NF . NF is tuff though, gotta give 'em that, but then again I've NEVER had a scope fail in the field, no matter who's it was.
     

  3. Broz

    Broz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,637
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Interesting. Were you looking through an NXS? Were they both on the same power? If so what power setting did you use to compare? You say the NF reticle was much thinner. Were they both FFP's? I like thin reticles for shot placement, this is why I do not like the FFP's as the reticle appears to get larger as the power is increased. How far were you looking?

    Thanks
    Jeff
     
  4. 338 bruce

    338 bruce Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    230
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    thats the comparison I have been looking for, thanks for post.
     
  5. joseph

    joseph Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,238
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    OOPS, I had the PST FFP MOA scope on 24x and the NF was on 20x and we were both looking at our targets which were next to each other at 400 yds.

    I just called the guy with the NF and he said that his was an older one and it is 5.5-20x56mm and is "not" a FFP.

    The reason why I was so surprised that my new 6-24x PST FFP MOA definitely looked brighter and clearer was because when I had the first 6-24x PST which was exchanged for this one with the tighter turrets I compared the old one to this NF and the NF was much clearer.

    I guess I need to do the comparison again. I will also call Vortex and ask about this.

    joseph
     
  6. royinidaho

    royinidaho Writers Guild

    Messages:
    8,853
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    RE: your OOPS........

    That was a big handicap the PST was given. 24 for it and 20x for the NF should have given the opposite results under any condition.

    The thing that swayed my to the NF was completely visceral. Some fellows on the bench next to me had the NXS. I asked to look through it. They said sure. I then asked if I could focus it for 'my' eyes. Again they said sure. Wow what a difference even with a very slight adjustment.

    A sparrow size bird was hopping on a bush at about 900 yds. Not only could I clearly steady the reticle on the bird, I could pick any part of the bird. Some where in my future is a head shot on a magpie, oops crow at some great distance.:)

    When I did my scope comparisons it was between Leupold VX-III, Ziess Conquest and NF. The Ziess was 4 times better than the Leuy. The NF was twice better than the Zeiss. I bought the Zeiss, being a conservative fella (read cheap). For my final and probably last build I went with the NXS

    Eagerly awaiting your further investigation.