Leupold Mark 4 vs Nightforce NXS
- Thread starter WSM55
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
cummins cowboy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2010
- Messages
- 361
last year I bought a nightforce and the more I use it the more I am determined to never buy leupold anything ever again. I spent so long with a crappy mark 4 that would not return to zero reliably. even a trip back to leupold didn't fix it. the mark 4 was not a cheap scope either. when you have a rifle capable of 1/4 moa at 200 yards you really begin to expose how inferior leupold is. for a serious rifle that I move the turrets on it will never be a leupold again. I don't care about how they changed the springs in the erector and made them twin springs. it is not a nightforce.
dragman
Well-Known Member
No contest NXS destroys the mark4!
My friend has both on guns and side by side its easy to see the NF wins.
My friend has both on guns and side by side its easy to see the NF wins.
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
I disagree with the Mk4 notions. I've used 8.5x25 Mk4s alongside NXS 22x & 32x for quite awhile, and the Mk4s are superior overall. Same glass, but way lighter than NXS, and Mk4s are actually MOA in adjustment, where NFs are not. Also, the Alumina flip-ups put whatever you stick on a NF to shame.
With the NF, I also run into an optical condition where eyepiece adjustment for focus reduces power a great deal. With this, the 32x NXS, adjusted for my eyes, exactly matches a 25x Mk4 also adjusted for my eyes. My eyes are tested twice a year due to profession, they're average, nothing weird.
I've tested the hell out of my scopes, and it is my Mk4s that are most accurate in adjustment, and zero return.
I do like the services provided by both companies. But my scope choice goes to Leupold Mk4 in second focal plane.
With the NF, I also run into an optical condition where eyepiece adjustment for focus reduces power a great deal. With this, the 32x NXS, adjusted for my eyes, exactly matches a 25x Mk4 also adjusted for my eyes. My eyes are tested twice a year due to profession, they're average, nothing weird.
I've tested the hell out of my scopes, and it is my Mk4s that are most accurate in adjustment, and zero return.
I do like the services provided by both companies. But my scope choice goes to Leupold Mk4 in second focal plane.
I have a few each of the Mk4s and NXS/Benchrest NF scopes including a G7. I have used both brands for several years for hunting and LR competition. While I have been successful with both, under difficult conditions of mirage, haze, and low light I would give the advantage to the NF optical quality. The clicks on the M4's are vague and I have actualy lost clicks at spots in the turret revolution range. The only aspect of the NF NXS that i don't like is the bulk and weight when mounted on my lighter, mid range carry rigs. On the other hand, the NF G7 is my clear favorite for LR hunting. The 20 MOA revolution, Zero stop, and the reticle sustention/ design fits my needs perfectly. The ability to order a yardage turret that also has an additional MOA scale at the bottom of the turret is a great feature for more technical LR shooting.
A couple of months ago at a sniper match I had the opportunity to try my buddy's NF ATACR. We had terrible conditions. Haze, mirage, then rain. The optical quality of this scope was substantially better than MK 4 I was using. I would expect it to have been better than my NXS as well. The only thing I didn't like was the reticle substention which was too heavy for my likes. I'm hoping the G7 is produced with this model, or NF comes out with a more reticle choices.
A couple of months ago at a sniper match I had the opportunity to try my buddy's NF ATACR. We had terrible conditions. Haze, mirage, then rain. The optical quality of this scope was substantially better than MK 4 I was using. I would expect it to have been better than my NXS as well. The only thing I didn't like was the reticle substention which was too heavy for my likes. I'm hoping the G7 is produced with this model, or NF comes out with a more reticle choices.
HARPERC
Well-Known Member
If weights an issue go Leupold. If not, the Nightforce would be my choice.
Mikecr
Well-Known Member
NXS pros: zero stop, best reticles available
NXS cons: Weight
Mk4 pros: Weight, Alumina flip-ups
Mk4 cons: poor reticle selection
The glass is equal between them, and price is ~same class
NXS cons: Weight
Mk4 pros: Weight, Alumina flip-ups
Mk4 cons: poor reticle selection
The glass is equal between them, and price is ~same class
dragman
Well-Known Member
Mikecr,
our exsperiences are very different. we were spotting with two rigs side by side and I was getting much better results as far as clairty and power out of the NF. since they are both EXCELLENT scopes I would have to chalk that up to the users eye.
our exsperiences are very different. we were spotting with two rigs side by side and I was getting much better results as far as clairty and power out of the NF. since they are both EXCELLENT scopes I would have to chalk that up to the users eye.
Alan Griffith
Well-Known Member
I have both, I run both. I love them both. With that said, Leupold has had their head stuck up a dark hole when it comes to reticle selection. It matters not to me if someone want's MIL/MIL or MOA/MOA, but dang it. Give the customer what he wants. You'd think I'd want an all MIL scope because I'm retired Army but I'm an MOA man. Their weird sense of mixing an MOA turret with a MIL reticle is totally beyond me. I talked to Leupold's CS last week and they finally are coming out with a MOA reticle (TS-32 I think) but it's a $160+shipping custom option and only for the 4.5-14 scope line-up. They should have been installing an MOA reticle some 10 years back. I put up with NF's weight because they have incredible MOA reticles and the design, manuf and QC to make sure that their dial ups are spot on. With Shawn Carlock living in Idaho, a state that has a 16 lb, IIRC, weight limit on hunting rifles he might prefer a lighter Leupold but no, I believe he still uses NF. For many of my hunting rifles I use Leupold but for LR, NF!!!
Alan
Alan
cwinner
Well-Known Member
The answer to your question lies with the focal plane, NF does not have much in the way of FFP.......if you want FFP go with a Leupold if second focal meets your needs then go Leupold again 
.....seriously I run leupolds and my buddies run Nightforce, premier and vortex.......it's a never ending debate and a source of constant ribbing.
I like all my rifles to have the same scope......Leupold Mk-IV M5 6.5-20 TMR FFP, I have four of them and have never had any serious issues......
Oh by the way, I'm not saying all leupolds track perfect but neither do all night forces, the important thing to test both and determine what your correction factor is, btw we recently returned a $3k premier that would not track or return to zero.
.....seriously I run leupolds and my buddies run Nightforce, premier and vortex.......it's a never ending debate and a source of constant ribbing.I like all my rifles to have the same scope......Leupold Mk-IV M5 6.5-20 TMR FFP, I have four of them and have never had any serious issues......
Oh by the way, I'm not saying all leupolds track perfect but neither do all night forces, the important thing to test both and determine what your correction factor is, btw we recently returned a $3k premier that would not track or return to zero.
HARPERC
Well-Known Member
There's the difficulty in buying high end scopes for most of us. Even if it gets fixed, by the reputable companies, it just takes all the fun out of it.
brentc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2009
- Messages
- 2,635
The Leupold TMR in an SFP scope will subtend MOA at slightly less than max power and it works great. I actually like the design of the TMR in the Mark 4. Not that I use my reticle for ranging very often. I guess I've come to love the accuracy of a quality rangefinder too much. But it's nice to know if you absolutely must use the reticle.
