Mark 4 or NF (Need Help)

yote doctor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
632
Location
Big Sky Country
Its gonna be the Mark 4 (4.5-14x50) LR M1 or the NF nxs 3.5-15x50 in second focal plane. This is a two part question. First is, as far as clarity and field of view, which is better optics. Next, I would like to know if I could share this scope between two rifles. Both are for long range hunting and punching paper out to 1k. Once i put in the work that is. So say your at the range and want to work both rifles. With the right rails and rings would this setup be able to hold consistancy at all times? Hope somone can help!
 
Last edited:

BillR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2002
Messages
426
Location
Nebraska
I have both. As far as clarity/color rendition etc. I can't really tell much difference. The Night Force might pull a small edge ahead but its really hard to tell. Mine are the MK4 6.5X20X50 and the NF NXS 5.5X22X56 ILC. Their both awesome scopes. The NF kind of pulls an edge due to its X range as it has a bit less and bit more but that is about it. I do notice that on my NF the the lines on the reticule appear to be squiggly which is kind of disconcerting while the MK4's are very straight. But that is just nitpicking. I do like the TM Reticule a bit better but again it is just nitpicking. Where I do see a huge difference is in the weight. The NF is a tank. Hopefully that means tougher. So it comes down to only a couple things for me. On my heavy gun in .308 is the NF and on my Hunting gun is the Mk4 as I like them both but I sure am not going to carry that added weight of the NF very far.
Sorry NF guys. Just MY opinion. You all know how opinions are. The only real way to tell is to sit down and compare the two yourself. They both have their advantages.
 

Broz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2007
Messages
8,638
Location
Townsend, Montana.
I bought a new Mark 4 TMR. Opened the box looked it over turned the turrets and put it back in the box and sold it. There was no comparison to the feel of the turrets. IMO th NXS is a way better scope. I keep looking at others but I always prefer my Nightforces. Must be why I now have 5 of them.

Jeff gun)gun)
 

Mikecr

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2003
Messages
5,544
Location
NC, oceanfront
I use both also.
But just opposite the others, I prefer Mk4s over NXS.
Mk4s are lighter, mount lower, can be customized through Leupold's custom shop(ordered through PlanetOptics), and the Alumina flip-ups combined with a non-eyepiece-turning zoom is very improved over Butlers on an NXS.
The glass quality is exactly the same between them.
All other features seem equal.
So as far as performance, it really comes down to reticle & weight.
 

yote doctor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
632
Location
Big Sky Country
Thanks for all the help guys. I mite just flip the old lucky coin and call it good! :cool: I do like both but will have to make a choice soon. Not a bad choice a man has to make....
 

mike33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
949
I just treated my self to ordering another NF 5.5-20 50mm zero stop, it will be # 2 for me.
Mike
 

Bulseyetom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
70
I have a Mark 4 3.5-10 and a Nightforce 2.5-10. I am going to sell the Leupold and get another Nightforce as the lash in the Leupold parallax adjustment is a royal pain in the keester. Both are optically the clearest scopes I have ever looked through and if it wasn't for the lash I would buy another Mark 4 in a heartbeat. jmho gun)
 

kellyzier

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
214
I have both. As far as clarity/color rendition etc. I can't really tell much difference. The Night Force might pull a small edge ahead but its really hard to tell. Mine are the MK4 6.5X20X50 and the NF NXS 5.5X22X56 ILC. Their both awesome scopes. The NF kind of pulls an edge due to its X range as it has a bit less and bit more but that is about it. I do notice that on my NF the the lines on the reticule appear to be squiggly which is kind of disconcerting while the MK4's are very straight. But that is just nitpicking. I do like the TM Reticule a bit better but again it is just nitpicking. Where I do see a huge difference is in the weight. The NF is a tank. Hopefully that means tougher. So it comes down to only a couple things for me. On my heavy gun in .308 is the NF and on my Hunting gun is the Mk4 as I like them both but I sure am not going to carry that added weight of the NF very far.
Sorry NF guys. Just MY opinion. You all know how opinions are. The only real way to tell is to sit down and compare the two yourself. They both have their advantages.


I have the Mark four and the Night Force....Although my Night Force has more power, it is more clear and in my opinion the Night Force is a better scope hands down. I really dont care about the extra weight when Im killing long range. My 15 yr old son shot his fist bull elk with my NXS at 940 yards. When we long range to near a mile, we always pull out my edge with the NXS. My Mark 4 stays at home.


Just my opion.....

KZ
 

lamiglas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
724
come on now, you really want us to believe your 15 year old shot an elk at 941 yards!

Just kidding kelly, cant wait to see the youtube of his 2000 yard shot!

how did the mile shooting go yesterday?

I almost forgot. I have two mark 4's and I really do like these scopes. I also have a NF and in my opinion there is no comparison. For a dedicated longrange gun, I would pick the NF hands down. to me the NF has slightly better glass, and the turrets seem much more rugged. I like the feel of the clicks better, and I absolutley love the zero stop.

both great scopes, good luck.
 
Last edited:

kellyzier

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
214
come on now, you really want us to believe your 15 year old shot an elk at 941 yards!

Just kidding kelly, cant wait to see the youtube of his 2000 yard shot!

how did the mile shooting go yesterday?

I almost forgot. I have two mark 4's and I really do like these scopes. I also have a NF and in my opinion there is no comparison. For a dedicated longrange gun, I would pick the NF hands down. to me the NF has slightly better glass, and the turrets seem much more rugged. I like the feel of the clicks better, and I absolutley love the zero stop.

both great scopes, good luck.

2,000 YARDS!!!!!!!!!!!

This is only my son's 2nd year behind the 338 edge but he's doing great. Of course dad is doping the wind for him, but he's a great trigger guy. I will post last weeks shots at 1,400 and 1,600 yards with the edge, he did great

We set up the 2,000 yard steal target this weekend, didn't shoot, spent more time scouting. Our goal is to shoot at this distance to learn the wind in the valleys and ridges and then have him drop a deer in the same area. Heck alot of times we see deer and elk tracks a few feet in front of our targets.

My son wants to beat "Team Carlocks" 1,935 yard record this year. It's going to be tough cause the shots on the ridge range from 1,800 to just over 2,100 yards. And we can't control where the deer come out.

I will post some fotos soon....

C ya
kz
 

Tim8654

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
11
Location
Virginia
I bought a new Mark 4 TMR. Opened the box looked it over turned the turrets and put it back in the box and sold it. There was no comparison to the feel of the turrets. IMO th NXS is a way better scope. I keep looking at others but I always prefer my Nightforces. Must be why I now have 5 of them.

Jeff gun)gun)


I have had a similar experience, I started with Leupold scopes before I heard of Nightforce and have been selling them to buy NF's after trying a friend's. To me the biggest difference is in the turrets and how much more "solid" they feel at each click, the Leupold feels a bit sloppy after a few years of use. If you are going to be dialing elevation there is not question. I think the lens clarity is about the same though.
 

Chas1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
3,739
I prefer NF, however with either I think you'd be happy. As one other said earlier, the only way to make a good decision is to do the touchy feely look through on both.
 

idig4au

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2008
Messages
17
2,000 YARDS!!!!!!!!!!!

This is only my son's 2nd year behind the 338 edge but he's doing great. Of course dad is doping the wind for him, but he's a great trigger guy. I will post last weeks shots at 1,400 and 1,600 yards with the edge, he did great

We set up the 2,000 yard steal target this weekend, didn't shoot, spent more time scouting. Our goal is to shoot at this distance to learn the wind in the valleys and ridges and then have him drop a deer in the same area. Heck alot of times we see deer and elk tracks a few feet in front of our targets.

My son wants to beat "Team Carlocks" 1,935 yard record this year. It's going to be tough cause the shots on the ridge range from 1,800 to just over 2,100 yards. And we can't control where the deer come out.

I will post some fotos soon....

C ya
kz

He must be a great shot. But that is still not ethical for hunting nor does it set a good example. This could be taken as just killing. Hopefully you don't lose a deer at those ranges. This web site should be called long range killing, because it sure as **** not hunting. Hunting is putting on a stalk and getting into ethical range for a shot you can make 10/10 times.
 

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