Any NightForce NX8 reviews ???

KSB209

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
92
Location
Republic of California
I’ve been looking at the NF NX8 in 2.5-20 F2. Does anyone have one they can tell me about? I hate reading reviews in publications because I believe most of them are somewhat paid for. Just looking for real world experiences and pros and cons. The main purpose for me is hunting out to 400-500 yards. Going to either go on a 308 or 300WM.

one thing I am concerned about is the illuminated reticle. I’ve read twice that it covers a pretty large area. I read somewhere that it covers approx 5 MOA at 800 yards. I typically don’t use illumination but if I needed it I don’t want it covering my target.

not sure I need the 4-32 but would be interested in feed back on that too. I just don’t see myself needing 32x power for my applications but for an extra $200 why not. But considering I want a 2nd focal I think the 32x power might not be the beat choice.
 

snox801

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
3,208
Location
Spring Lake Michigan
I do not have that scope that being said I have never been a fan of lighted scopes they all wash out for my eyes so I never use them. I would also do the 2.5-20. The 2.5 is very nice for most hunting. Especially if you are walking. And you can shoot way past your goals on 20x.
I’m a huge nightforce fan and was gonna get one of the nx8 2.5-20 but went with the March as it was still lighter by a decent amount. And it’s a ultra light so that the way I went.
 

The Oregonian

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2012
Messages
1,156
Location
Missoula, Montana
I would call and ask NF. I called them and asked about the NX8 2.5-20 vs the ATACR 4-16 and the pros and cons of each, and how those fit into the areas where I was and wasn’t willing to make sacrifices. I went with the ATACR, and the thing that kind of broke it for me with the NX8 was the eye box sensitivity. I hunt whitetail and if I am hunting and have to shoot closer in from a non-ideal position I want acquisition to be as quick as possible. The ATACR also has ED glass throughout whereas the NX8 has some ED glass but not all the lenses.

Not trying to talk you out of it bc it depends on what is important to you, and the large mag range is definitely appealing, as is having 2.5x on the low end was pretty appealing for whitetail hunting.

*Disclaimer - I haven’t looked through an NX8 but have a few ATACRs and the NF rep used that as a point of comparison when describing the NX8.
 

snox801

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Messages
3,208
Location
Spring Lake Michigan
I think the weight is also a big difference with the two. Atacr is the top of the heap for me but what drew me to the 8 was weight.
 

HuntnPack

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
519
Location
The Wilderness
I purchased a NX8 4-32 f1 prior to the F2’s being released. Nice optic, but I do prefer F2.
A couple things I didn’t care for with the 4-32 was the reticle for me was not very useful on low power, & too large on high. Also lost some clarity above 22 power.
I opted to sell the 4-32 & purchased a 2.5-20 F2 NX8. Fantastic optic.!! I opted for the 2.5 over the 4-32 thinking I don’t use over 20 power & I also wasn’t keen on the New dual
Grid line reticle on the 4-32 f2.
In regards to the 2.5-20 F2, I find the reticle useable through out the power range, simple & un cluttered. The floating dot is a nice feature for the shot distances I’d take. I’ve had no issues with dot size
making good hits out past 700 yds.
The illumination is only the dots & at a low intensity setting, it’s perfect for low light use.
All controls are smooth & positive. I don’t find the eye box to be too finicky or have any parallax adjustment issue once scope was set up for eye relief correctly & with solid repeatable cheek weld. Pleased to find images crisp & clear even on highest setting. The lighter weight, short length, & 2.5-20 power range is perfect for my hunting use.
Great optic for a wide range of hunting use.
Tracks Perfect, returns to zero, precise click adjustments. Priced fairly.
 
Last edited:

Rifleman97

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2017
Messages
179
I would call and ask NF. I called them and asked about the NX8 2.5-20 vs the ATACR 4-16 and the pros and cons of each, and how those fit into the areas where I was and wasn’t willing to make sacrifices. I went with the ATACR, and the thing that kind of broke it for me with the NX8 was the eye box sensitivity. I hunt whitetail and if I am hunting and have to shoot closer in from a non-ideal position I want acquisition to be as quick as possible. The ATACR also has ED glass throughout whereas the NX8 has some ED glass but not all the lenses.

Not trying to talk you out of it bc it depends on what is important to you, and the large mag range is definitely appealing, as is having 2.5x on the low end was pretty appealing for whitetail hunting.

*Disclaimer - I haven’t looked through an NX8 but have a few ATACRs and the NF rep used that as a point of comparison when describing the NX8.

I have not used the NX8 myself but I have looked through one, the 2.5-20 side by side with an ATACR. The glass is for all intents and purposes the same. The ATACR was slightly better but nothing that I would ever notice if they weren’t side by side.

That said, the eye box really is not very forgiving on the 2.5-20, but it’s not as bad as some say. But, I wouldn’t want it on a deer rifle either. I also got to look through the 1-8 NX8, and that one actually had a worse eye box than the 2.5-20 did to my eyes.

NX8 is also way lighter than the ATACR, and a lot shorter, but it felt very tough to me, didn’t feel like they sacrificed sturdiness at all. Turrets felt very similar to NXS, so really **** good but not ATACR good. But that’s the cost of weight and price reduction from the ATACR.

I have not used one on a gun yet so I don’t have any opinion on real world use yet however, so someone else will have to chime in on that.

Edit: to clarify, the NX8’s I looked through were both FFP, and the reticle at max mag did not cover all that much. Also, the illuminated reticle was a little confusing to use on the 2.5-20, but it did not cover anywhere near 5moa like someone said they had heard. At low magnification the reticle is unbelievably thin so at max mag it doesn’t cover very much. Have not looked through the SFP
 

highdrum

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
Montana
I have a pair of 4-32x50 in sfp and ffp, milC reticles. I like both scopes a fair bit. The parallax needs constant attention, as the depth of field is low due to the 8x zoom ratio and short 30mm tube construction. Many speek to the sensitivity of the eyebox, but if you have your shooting position built properly and a stock that gives consistent cheek weld, I've had no issues with it. The downfall of the nx8 is that in the upper 20% of mag range, it performs dismal in low light situations. I use my 4-32 "scopes essentially from 4-26x as above 26x the view is rather dim unless you're in very bright shooting situations. Tracking, durability, turret dexterity, illumination, and all physical aspects of the scope have performed very well for me.
 

nmbarta

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
751
Location
billings mt
It seems that this is a trending situation that doesn't work. In sfp its fine, but 8x zoom ratio in ffp just doesn't work. I caught some heck for my opinion on the March 3-24, for saying it's a 6-18 if you want to use it.
A lot of this stuff looks good on paper, but really just doesn't make sense.
I'd just like an nsx with some better glass, never needed less than 5.5 for hunting and 22 is plenty. Exit pupil gets stupid much beyond d that anyway.
I'd love a 6-18 sfp with NF quality top tier glass, no illumination for 1500.00 bucks!!
That covers 99% of what I need, and will still work for the other 1% with some practice.
I've been battling this myself, it's a big investment and a tough call.
 

Triple BB

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
506
Location
Wyoming
Will second some of what was noted above. I have a ffp 4x32. Went to do some shooting this morning as it was our first day of no wind in 3 weeks. Unfortunately it was around 10 - 15 degrees when I set up. The parallax knob was sticky which was a surprise. With the low light, I didn't go past 20x. Everything over that was blurry. Having said that, I'm not changing scopes. With it being so cold, wish I would've went duck hunting instead...
 

Rifleman97

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2017
Messages
179
I'd just like an nsx with some better glass, never needed less than 5.5 for hunting and 22 is plenty. Exit pupil gets stupid much beyond d that anyway.
The best scope I’ve ever had was my nxs 5.5-22x56. I regret selling that scope but I needed the money, so it had to go.
The only reason I haven’t bought another one to replace it is the fact there’s so many scopes today with so much better glass quality, but they all sacrifice on something that the NXS didn’t. Either durability and turrets (Swarovski) or eyebox (Nightforce NX8) or they’re just absolutely massive (the trijicon 34mm tube scopes)
It makes it hard to decide because all I want is the 5.5-22 NXS but with the better glass of the NX8 or ATACR. The short scope size of the NX8 is nice to have, and easier to do with less than 8x zoom range, but I’d be happy with the good ole NXS with an ED glass upgrade to give the colors more pop.
 

Doc88

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2016
Messages
587
Location
Florence, SC
I have a pair of 4-32x50 in sfp and ffp, milC reticles. I like both scopes a fair bit. The parallax needs constant attention, as the depth of field is low due to the 8x zoom ratio and short 30mm tube construction. Many speek to the sensitivity of the eyebox, but if you have your shooting position built properly and a stock that gives consistent cheek weld, I've had no issues with it. The downfall of the nx8 is that in the upper 20% of mag range, it performs dismal in low light situations. I use my 4-32 "scopes essentially from 4-26x as above 26x the view is rather dim unless you're in very bright shooting situations. Tracking, durability, turret dexterity, illumination, and all physical aspects of the scope have performed very well for me.
I mirror this exactly. Have not used a 2nd FP one yet but have a 2.5-20 F2 on the way. Glass is definitely better than NXS. It's the reliability, reduction in weight (compared to the ATACR) that attracts me. Glass is good, not Zeiss/Swarovski good but above average good. Did I mention NF reliabilty...
 

WAHOOYAHOO

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2016
Messages
256
Location
The Great Republic of Texas
I mirror this exactly. Have not used a 2nd FP one yet but have a 2.5-20 F2 on the way. Glass is definitely better than NXS. It's the reliability, reduction in weight (compared to the ATACR) that attracts me. Glass is good, not Zeiss/Swarovski good but above average good. Did I mention NF reliabilty...
Yup. I have the F1 2.5-20. I have bad color vision and generally don't see illumination well if it is red. I'm super pleased with the illumination in the NX8 (it is red or green), in fairness, OP is asking about F2. I can't comment on the illumination of F2, but the F1 illumination is the best of any scope I have had.
 

Primary

LRH Assistant
Here are some related products that LRH members are talking about. Clicking on a product will take you to LRH’s partner, Primary, where you can find links to LRH discussions about these products.

 
 
Top