VX6HD vs Ziess V6 vs NXS

Brush Buster

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
157
What do you guys prefer on a long range hunting scope? I think Im leaning towards the leupy with tmoa reticle but still not sure. The Nightforce is nice but awfully heavy as well.
 

skierhs

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
259
Location
Montana
I also prefer the nxs out of those three. It’s heavy but you can drive your tent stakes in with the scope and still keep zero.
 

.270

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
86
Location
TX
I have a 5.5-22x56 nxs and two v6, both 3-15x50. I like the glass better on the v6 and they lighter. I haven't done a lot of dialing with them but I haven't had any problems with tracking. The nxs has been flawless every time I have used it. I would look at both and go with which you like better.
 

.270

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
86
Location
TX
The mark 5 does look nice but I like moa and sfp for dialing long ranges. I do have mil and ffp scopes but I found I prefer moa/sfp. Can't help you out on the mark 5.
 

skierhs

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
259
Location
Montana
What about Leupold Mark 5hd? FFP seems kinda nice
If your looking at that style of scope I’d highly suggest looking at the NF atacr series. The controls and glass crush the nxs and allows for a F1 (which I prefer for long range stuff) and the perks are very nice.
 
OP
Brush Buster

Brush Buster

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
157
I believe leupold now has the mark5 in either mil or moa.
270, why do you like second focal plane over first focal plane? I’ve only ever used second focal plane, but I’m not really sure what the disadvantages are to second focal plane. Not saying second focal plane is bad, just trying to understand the benefits of each.
 

davsco

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
337
Location
VA
with first focal plane, your reticle is accurate for holdovers and windage holds at any magnification. with 2nd, your reticle is only accurate at one magnification (with nxs it's at the max magnification), so if you're not at max mag, you have to do a little math to figure out what the hash marks are.

prob with ffp is at low magnification, your reticle is pretty small and will be less usable/readable. with sfp your reticle stays the same size over the magnification range.
 

rfurman24

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,516
The mark 5 does look nice but I like moa and sfp for dialing long ranges. I do have mil and ffp scopes but I found I prefer moa/sfp. Can't help you out on the mark 5.
Why do you prefer sfp for dialing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
OP
Brush Buster

Brush Buster

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
157
Seems like as long as the reticle has a usable thickness across the magnification range, ffp is a great way to go for dialing and being able to accurately holdover.
 

codym

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
295
Location
Las Cruces
I am one of the guys that prefers 2nd fp for hunting. When at low mag the ret is very small for me its hard to use. If I’m shooting long range I’m on max power and dialing elevation, the only advantage my ffp scopes is not having to worry about what power it’s on for a wind hold. For tactical/PRs type shooting I prefer ffp.
 

elkguide

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2016
Messages
2,486
Location
Vermont
The scopes you mentioned in my preferential order would be...……...

NightForce (Atacr or NXS)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ziess
.
.
.
.
Leupold
 

notchfir3

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
137
Location
Arkansas
I've had the SHV F1 and currently own the Zeiss V4. I liked the SHV ok, but the F1 version has short eye releif. The glass and reticle were very good. Wasn't really crazy about the turret. So far. I'm really enjoying the Z4. To me it has better turrets
(at least the elevation turret) adn the glass to my eye is comparable to the SHV. Its also 5-6 ounces lighter. I'd choose the Zeiss.
 

.270

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
86
Location
TX
I basically like sfp because it is what I am most comfortable with. I dial for elevation and windage (the best I can) for longer ranges and usually don’t use the reticles for holdovers. If I do use the reticles for windage, I am usually at full magnification so the moa distances on the reticles stands true. I have a SIG tango 6 in ffp and I have no problems using the ffp and can see the advantages for tactical/PRS shooting events. For my long range hunting, I am prone, comfortable, target distance known and I don’t see the need for ffp .
 

Ryan Avery

Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
5,335
I shot a bull moose at 1775 and a bull elk at 1583 with the NXS.

I would not have even attempted it with the other two.

You have to have 100% confidence in your equipment. I trust NF, the others not so much.
 

skierhs

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2017
Messages
259
Location
Montana
I shot a bull moose at 1775 and a bull elk at 1583 with the NXS.

I would not have even attempted it with the other two.

You have to have 100% confidence in your equipment. I trust NF, the others not so much.
Not to derail the thread but what was your set up like for the moose and even elk? Caliber, scope, ballistic computer, gun etc if you don’t mind sharing or feel free to pm unless we can read about it somewhere else.
 
Top