Recommend a scope

[B_Reynolds_AK]

Idk. I’ve read where guys here complain about the NX8 1-8’s low light performance.

And since we’re doing the quote Form thing…


View attachment 889267

Personally I think it’s fine in low light, unless you’re actually talking past civil twilight. In fact I’ll have another NX8 1-8 DMX here in a couple days. Planing on doing a review on it. Even though I didn’t love the original, I think with the new reticle and better optical performance on the high end could make it a great option for a lot of use cases, from dangerous game to lightweight mountain hunting.

 

[Macintosh]

O

I suggested LPVO / MVPO.
"Allow me to point out 400 yards. LPVO and MVPO if you want to jump up to a 2.5-10x and 22oz."

Let's review what he posted:
- Africa, Alaska, and Western
- inside 400 yards
- light weight
- Durable
- good low light (34mm main tube)
The downside to most LPVO/MVPO is lack of parallax at distance.
The upside of LPVO is 1x ( game changer imo)
Check out the higher end FFP LPVO's and MVPO's with good glass - they are quite good, fit a wide range, and low light has improved quite a bit
They are not cheap.

I didnt mention a lpvo earlier only because I understood the desire for not just acceptable, but exceptional low light performance. Fair enough. I personally find my 1-6 accupoint good till end of legal light in some pretty dark woods, but others eyes are different and I wouldnt call it exceptional. But depending on conditions and what youre comparing to, perhaps some lpvo’s are good contenders.

Regardless, the only quibble I have with the quoted post is the parallax. Adjustable parallax is a waste on a scope for shooting 400 yards and in. I believe it is very safe to say that realistic parallax error simply isnt enough to matter at that range, that is easily shown at the range. Regardless of magnification I would absolutely not let the lack of adjustable parallax deter you from a scope with the stated parameters.

 

[cafemike]

I didnt mention a lpvo earlier only because I understood the desire for not just acceptable, but exceptional low light performance. Fair enough. I personally find my 1-6 accupoint good till end of legal light in some pretty dark woods, but others eyes are different and I wouldnt call it exceptional. But depending on conditions and what youre comparing to, perhaps some lpvo’s are good contenders.

Regardless, the only quibble I have with the quoted post is the parallax. Adjustable parallax is a waste on a scope for shooting 400 yards and in. I believe it is very safe to say that realistic parallax error simply isnt enough to matter at that range, that is easily shown at the range. Regardless of magnification I would absolutely not let the lack of adjustable parallax deter you from a scope with the stated parameters.

Typo on my part earlier regarding the 24 main tube. Jumping up to a 28 is noticeable - not huge but noticeable ( I have the Credo FFP in 1x6 and 1x8 - and the 1-8x is a totally different optic). The 1-6x is very good and the 1-8x is exceptional.
The entrance of the 1-8/10 LPVO is noticeably better than the 1-6x ie game changer .
Like anything your mileage may vary.
I brought up parallax since "IMO" FFP are a bit more sensitive and that is depending on the weather conditions.
I have both parallax and non FFP's and find it useful under certain conditions.
Nightforce has the NXS 2-10 SFP that is damn nice and only weighs 20oz.

 

[sndmn11]

Welcome to Rokslide

Don't step on Eddie's toes

 

[plebe]

Personally I think it’s fine in low light, unless you’re actually talking past civil twilight. In fact I’ll have another NX8 1-8 DMX here in a couple days. Planing on doing a review on it. Even though I didn’t love the original, I think with the new reticle and better optical performance on the high end could make it a great option for a lot of use cases, from dangerous game to lightweight mountain hunting.

Personally, I don’t don’t disagree…just following the gossip…but I haven’t used that scope either. I do have the ATACR 1-8 FC/DMX though.

 

[Randy11]

Any input on Steiner scopes?

They're fantastic. The 2.5-10 predator with the E3 reticle would fit your use really well.

 

[keystone112]

The SWFA SS 3-9 is worth a look.

If you’re not in a hurry, wait for the 3-14 RokScope to become available.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

The SWFA SS 3-9 is worth a look.

If you’re not in a hurry, wait for the 3-14 RokScope to become available.

I didn’t realize it was settled on 3-14. I’ll have to read more about it.

I am not one to spend a ton of unnecessary money on optics (I prefer to spend money on ammo for more practice), so my pick is almost always going to be the SWFA. But I have not used mine a lot in low light.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[fwafwow]

Don't step on Eddie's toes

Good point. Edited.

 

[SW hunter]

Negative. Half those recommendations are NOT rock solid.

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. That you have used those and developed your opinion during real world use.

I get too cynical sometimes. Theres a lot of stuff that gets posted and repeated and reposted and easily becomes unquestionable.

 

[blackwood]

Leupold VX3hd or a vortex viper are what come to mind for me. I have a viper personally and it’s a pretty solid scope, but the eye relief is a little close for my taste.

 

[z987k]

It is going on my new 338Fed so my maximum shots are 350-400 yards but will be taken on some big hunts to Africa, Alaska and western US. I want to keep it under 22 ounces, preferably under 20. Being able to make a shot in low light is very important to me. I am not buying a Leupold. I can dial for elevation but would need a locking turret. I can use just the reticle without dialing too. The Vortex Razor LHT meets the requirements but I do not know how it is in low light and….it is a Vortex. I am also looking at a Swarovski Z5, Zeiss V4 with various reticles. Anything else out there I need to look at? I am not too worried about budget but planning on $1500 but would spend more for the right scope.

I have the swfa 3-9 on my 338 fed. Its great to 338 fed max range.
If you prefer sfp and quite a bit more money the nxs 2.5-10 is a good one.
If you're not going to dial the accupoint 3-9 is very light and a good scope.

 

[z987k]

O

I suggested LPVO / MVPO.
"Allow me to point out 400 yards. LPVO and MVPO if you want to jump up to a 2.5-10x and 22oz."

Let's review what he posted:
- Africa, Alaska, and Western
- inside 400 yards
- light weight
- Durable
- good low light (34mm main tube)
The downside to most LPVO/MVPO is lack of parallax at distance.
The upside of LPVO is 1x ( game changer imo)
Check out the higher end FFP LPVO's and MVPO's with good glass - they are quite good, fit a wide range, and low light has improved quite a bit
They are not cheap.

Ooh. Tell us more about how a 34mm main tube increases low light performance.
Also, what is the maximum possible parallax error at 400yards? Let's say a 44mm objective lense.

 

[cafemike]

Ooh. Tell us more about how a 34mm main tube increases low light performance.
Also, what is the maximum possible parallax error at 400yards? Let's say a 44mm objective lense

Own any LPVOs? There is a noticeable difference between the FFP 1-6x vs the 1x8 Credo (yes, I own both).
The high end 1-8/10 FFP are damn incredible vs the traditional 1-4/6. The latest version of the upper end 1-10x's are worth considering.
I like the 34 mm tube as I feel that it gathers more light even - maybe its just maybe my mind. But when I have both rifles at the same time/location and do a side to side - the 1-8x has the "damn" factor.

Parallax on some FFPs - a side focus can help with the image at full magnification- yards has nothing to do with it.

Btw, I had the CREDO 2-10x 36 FFP scope and the image was soft at max mag. Im not the only one who noticed that a side focus would have help -

Forgive me in advance for repeating this - nothing to do with yards but magnification of the specific design.

For what it worth - this my experience with a few FFP's 2x-10 range on 308/30.06/338 with and w/o side focus and multiple (1-4/6/8) LPVO's on 556. My favorite 2/2.5-10x that own are the Vudu 2.5-10 FFP and Viper 2.5-10x32 FFP GEN 1 with a side focus at 18oz (both are discontinued).
Caveat Emptor - YMMV
Peace

 

[plebe]

…
If you're not going to dial the accupoint 3-9 is very light and a good scope.

Which reticle do you think suits this use case best?

 

[Demlockian]

Didn't read the entire thread, but I would seriously consider the Swarovski Optik Z5 | 3.5-18x44 P BT | Plex Reticle for your setup. It's lightweight, amazingly clear, and has a ballistic turret for taking accurate shots at range. I have mine zeroed for 200 and the corresponding-colored indicators for 300, 400, and 500.

https://www.swarovskioptik.com/us/en/hunting/products/rifle-scopes/z5-i/z5-i-3-5-18x44/z5-3p5-18x44-p-bt

 

[z987k]

Which reticle do you think suits this use case best?

The only one with holdovers. The mil dot.

 

[z987k]

Own any LPVOs? There is a noticeable difference between the FFP 1-6x vs the 1x8 Credo (yes, I own both).
The high end 1-8/10 FFP are damn incredible vs the traditional 1-4/6. The latest version of the upper end 1-10x's are worth considering.
I like the 34 mm tube as I feel that it gathers more light even - maybe its just maybe my mind. But when I have both rifles at the same time/location and do a side to side - the 1-8x has the "damn" factor.

Parallax on some FFPs - a side focus can help with the image at full magnification- yards has nothing to do with it.

Btw, I had the CREDO 2-10x 36 FFP scope and the image was soft at max mag. Im not the only one who noticed that a side focus would have help -

Forgive me in advance for repeating this - nothing to do with yards but magnification of the specific design.

For what it worth - this my experience with a few FFP's 2x-10 range on 308/30.06/338 with and w/o side focus and multiple (1-4/6/8) LPVO's on 556. My favorite 2/2.5-10x that own are the Vudu 2.5-10 FFP and Viper 2.5-10x32 FFP GEN 1 with a side focus at 18oz (both are discontinued).
Caveat Emptor - YMMV
Peace

You may feel that way but you're wrong. A scope body diameter has nothing whatsoever to do with its light gathering or transmitting abilities.

 

[06 SB]

You may feel that way but you're wrong. A scope body diameter has nothing whatsoever to do with its light gathering or transmitting abilities.

I understand that the objective size helps with gathering light. BUT when the body diameter is the objective diameter, wouldn't a 34mm LVPO gather more light than a 30mm and it more than a 1" LVPO?

Just asking the question that popped into my head.

 

[cafemike]

You may feel that way but you're wrong. A scope body diameter has nothing whatsoever to do with its light gathering or transmitting abilities.

So a larger tube contributes absolutely nothing vs a smaller all things equal?