Zeiss vs Nightforce

[Dalebow]

looking at the Zeiss Conquest HD5 3-15X50 or 3-15 X 42 and the Nightforce NXS 3-15 X 50 or 2.5-10 X 42 and wanted your thoughts on the better scope.
Ive owned several zeiss but never a night force and its going on a 300 win mag, Remington 700 thats been put in a mcmillan sporter stock.
Thanks for your help.gun)

 

[Sully2]

Ive a Conquest on a Win 300 Mag. Mine is a basic Win Model 70.

 

[IdahoCTD]

IMO the downfall of the Zeiss HD5's is the crosshairs. They are too thick. The varmint reticle is the only one that is a decent thickness .13" @ 100yds with the 5x25 set on 25x. The others are .23". A Nightforce is about .085" for a NPR-2 or a MOAR-T. For a shorter range hunting rifle they aren't bad but for precision long range work they are too thick IMO. The Zeiss glass is better, the scope is lighter, and the knobs are more compact which makes them a better hunting scope IMO. I'd own several more of them if they'd make a standard duplex reticle that was between the Nightforce and their varmint reticle thickness.

You might consider a Leupold VX-6 3x18 too.

 

[Rich Coyle]

You might consider a Leupold VX-6 3x18 too.

Second on this.

 

[Rick Richard]

I have VX 6 and NF. Both are good, but the NF is so much better for me.

 

[geo4061]

+1 for the NXS

 

[B-P-UU]

The 3-15 HD5 has a very finicky parallax adjustment. Also, on the one I had (sample size of one), you get this 'fish eye' appearance on 3x. It's hard to explain, but it's like the image seems distorted (not fuzzy) the further away from center you get. the 5-25's i've played with don't have this issue.

Honestly, I could see as much or more detail at 10x using the 2.5-10 NXS than I could on 15x using the HD5 in a side-by-side comparison. The NXS is a much better scope in my opinion.

I've got a 2.5-10x42 with the MOAR reticle that I've considered selling since I don't have a gun for it right now. PM me if you're interested.

 

[Rich Coyle]

The 3-15 HD5 has a very finicky parallax adjustment. Also, on the one I had (sample size of one), you get this 'fish eye' appearance on 3x. It's hard to explain, but it's like the image seems distorted (not fuzzy) the further away from center you get. the 5-25's i've played with don't have this issue.

Honestly, I could see as much or more detail at 10x using the 2.5-10 NXS than I could on 15x using the HD5 in a side-by-side comparison. The NXS is a much better scope in my opinion.

I've got a 2.5-10x42 with the MOAR reticle that I've considered selling since I don't have a gun for it right now. PM me if you're interested.

Maybe I posted this before, but since I'm old I will do it again. During daylight when I compared a Nightforce 5 1/2-22X56 with a Swarovski 5-25X52 on deer antlers in the woods 131 yards away the Nightforce glass was good enough for me to see the fork on 5 1/2X. The Swarovski z5 needed 8 1/4X for me to see the same detail. In a low light test the the Nightforce needed 20X while the Swarovski needed 25X.

When I compared the 12-42X56 Nightforce at 521 yards the the Nightforce needed 12 1/4X and the Swarovski needed 16 1/2X.

If Nightforce wasn't so heavy I would have one on my rifle.