Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Nikon black fx 1000 4x16 review
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tmmcampbell" data-source="post: 1578092" data-attributes="member: 13941"><p>Last week I asked about the Nikon Black 1000. No one had much information about the scope. Cabela's had them on sale so I bought one. </p><p></p><p>I bought the black 1000. It is a second focal plane. It was $499. Got it home and realized it did not have a zero stop. That's a no go for me. So I took it back and bought the black fx 1000. It is first focal plane but has a zero stop. It is difficult for my old eyes to see the reticle so I spent the extra $100 for the illuminated reticle. So now my $499 scope is a $699 scope. </p><p></p><p>The glass on both black 1000's are nice. They are on par with my leopold vx3 and Swfa. To my eyes my leupold mark 4 and sig whisky 5 has a little better glass, but it is close enough that it is difficult to tell the difference. Low light performance was so equal between these brands that it didn't make a difference to me. So overall I was impressed with the glass. </p><p></p><p>One weird thing to note is I bumped the scope on the table while looking at it. The noise it made was a "ting". Every other scope I've had is more a "tunk". I didn't take anything away from this other than it was weird. It appears to be a well made scope. </p><p></p><p>I mounted this on a bergara 6.5 Creedmoor that shoots in the .3s. I did a 20" box test it was on the money. Return to zero. And repeat. It tracks very well. The reticle also was right on the money for tracking. I am very impressed with it's tracking. </p><p></p><p>The zero stop is easy to set, and works as advertised. I really like the turrets. They had a good feel and were easy to use. I especially liked the windage turret. It has marked on the dial left and right with arrows. Yes I know down is right and up is left. I still like it on the dial so I don't have to think about it. The second focal plane did not have this feature. </p><p></p><p>Misses: The illuminated reticle is a joke. It was overcast today and you could not tell if it was on. In a very dark room you can barely see level 1. Level 10 is about as bright as level 5 on my sig. My opinion is the illumination is a waste of $100. (I put in the battery that came with it. I will try a new battery when I get the chance)</p><p></p><p>I also would not use this scope for hunting. It is too difficult to see the reticle until about 7 power. Maybe if the illumination was better, but it was not. </p><p></p><p>If Nikon put the turrets from the FX on the second focal plane for $500ish this would be one hell of a scope, and one I would buy more of. I very seriously doubt I would buy another FX as I'm not a first focal plane fan.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tmmcampbell, post: 1578092, member: 13941"] Last week I asked about the Nikon Black 1000. No one had much information about the scope. Cabela’s had them on sale so I bought one. I bought the black 1000. It is a second focal plane. It was $499. Got it home and realized it did not have a zero stop. That’s a no go for me. So I took it back and bought the black fx 1000. It is first focal plane but has a zero stop. It is difficult for my old eyes to see the reticle so I spent the extra $100 for the illuminated reticle. So now my $499 scope is a $699 scope. The glass on both black 1000’s are nice. They are on par with my leopold vx3 and Swfa. To my eyes my leupold mark 4 and sig whisky 5 has a little better glass, but it is close enough that it is difficult to tell the difference. Low light performance was so equal between these brands that it didn’t make a difference to me. So overall I was impressed with the glass. One weird thing to note is I bumped the scope on the table while looking at it. The noise it made was a “ting”. Every other scope I’ve had is more a “tunk”. I didn’t take anything away from this other than it was weird. It appears to be a well made scope. I mounted this on a bergara 6.5 Creedmoor that shoots in the .3s. I did a 20” box test it was on the money. Return to zero. And repeat. It tracks very well. The reticle also was right on the money for tracking. I am very impressed with it’s tracking. The zero stop is easy to set, and works as advertised. I really like the turrets. They had a good feel and were easy to use. I especially liked the windage turret. It has marked on the dial left and right with arrows. Yes I know down is right and up is left. I still like it on the dial so I don’t have to think about it. The second focal plane did not have this feature. Misses: The illuminated reticle is a joke. It was overcast today and you could not tell if it was on. In a very dark room you can barely see level 1. Level 10 is about as bright as level 5 on my sig. My opinion is the illumination is a waste of $100. (I put in the battery that came with it. I will try a new battery when I get the chance) I also would not use this scope for hunting. It is too difficult to see the reticle until about 7 power. Maybe if the illumination was better, but it was not. If Nikon put the turrets from the FX on the second focal plane for $500ish this would be one hell of a scope, and one I would buy more of. I very seriously doubt I would buy another FX as I’m not a first focal plane fan. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Nikon black fx 1000 4x16 review
Top