Haven't had a chance to handle this particular model. I know they are kind of heavy, but my main concern is the small objective. Are they pretty bright?

Tired of killing scopes, and want one with turrets.

If they would make the objective 36 or 40 i would buy one in a heartbeat. Cant make myself do it at 32

Forgot to ask, wondering if the reticles are bold enough when the illumination is turned off. The reticles look pretty thin.

they are OK, personally for the money my next variable will be the S&B 2.5 x 10 Summit.

Does the summit come with an elevation turret? The gun it is going on I built for shooting longer ranges.

No, however, Leica is offering an elevation only or elevation and windage turret option on their ER models.

Unfortunately, Leica is a bit out of my price range. Love the Leica products I do have though.

The S&B Summits can be ordered with the same turrets as on the Precision Hunter scopes per an email I recieved from S&B.

You are a bad influence!

Well, I think I'd like to have one someday. If you get one first, the chances of me getting a bad one go down...

Very cool, I wasn't aware that they'd do it on a custom basis.

With the recent price drop, the Leica ERs are more or less the same money as the Summits.

In the military sniping community Nightforce Optics have an almost unbelievable track record of durability, repeatability and consistency and if I didn't have to pay for them the 2.5-10x32 would be on nearly every one of my hunting rifles.

If that is the size/type of scope you are looking for, no way would I pick a Leica or Summit over it. As long as the mounting system is dressed appropriately, there is zero worry over whether that gun stays zeroed.



Another to look at is the SWFA Super Sniper 3-9x40, they are proving to be excellent scopes with those using them. In the last three months or so we have put 12-13,000 rounds through four of them. They all still have their original zeros. I've thought more then once about selling my Nightforce and replacing it with two of the Super Sniper's....

I've had the NF you mentioned for 3 years now, absolutely bullet proof with plenty of low light capability. I have it on my #1 deer rifle and low light ability is a must. I've owned both Swaros and Leica scopes with 40+mm obj's and the NF is every bit as bright in very low light situations.

I've been using one of these for a couple of years now on my 338wm. I had a NXS 3.5-15x50, with turrets on before this one and had found the turrets a little awkward.

I have found it works well at first and last light. I just got back from a trip to Alberta where I took a couple of Whitetails at the absolute last moments of light without issue. I killed a Grizzly this spring at last, last light - double lung, one shot. And hopefully at the crack of dawn on Saturday I'll whack a bullwinkle as there is still some room left in my freezer.

I don't know what the term is but I can see better with this scope in low light than I can with my naked eye. The 3.5-15x50 was better in low light, but it was stupid better, I could see in almost any light with that thing.

I use the NPR2 reticle and have not had any issues with target aquisition. I think some of this comes down to personal preference. For example, I had a 4200 with heavy post - did not care for it. It seemed to blot out too much of the target.

I have proven this to anyone who will admit to what they see through the scope. My 12-42X56 so far has no equal in low light.

its too bad NF doesn't make a 42 mm scope, a 4-20x42 would be right up my ally. add in an elevation turret only option as well.

Muledeer's review of brightness has the Summit at the highest rating of 8, I bet if you turn that NF to 10X and look through the thing at 6:50PM it looks like your looking into a dark room thru a toilet paper tube. Excuse me if I am on the wrong track, but I am thinking about hunting with a scope rather than shooting 12,000 rounds but that's just me.

The 32MM Objective scared me off. I just didn't think it would be effective looking into shadows or ravines at dusk.

I think it's a great scope, although the eyebox felt a little confining.

Anyone have a pic of a S&B elevation type turret? Curious what they look like, and definitely want one on whatever scope I get. Dialing elevation is a must for this purchase. S&B's website sucks, I cannot even find the Summit on there, or a list of options etc.

http://www.schmidtbender.com/scopes_policemarksman.shtml

??????

Interesting. 12,000 rounds is about shooting and killing, not admiring my pretty glass as I pull them out of the safe. Excuse me if I am on the wrong track, but I am thinking about how a scope works rather then pleasuring myself to the micro differences between top end glass that has nothing to do with killing ability.... But that's just me. I always thought that the first requirement of any scopes is to stay zeroed, and in the case of LR use to be consistent and repeatable.

Being that he wants to use it for LR, how many MOA of elevation does a Precision Hunter knob have available in that single turn? Is a Summit as suitable for turret twisting as the aforementioned Nightforce?

Here's a pic of a one from the Precision Hunter, per their website.


Here's the info alongside the above picture.

before you go off half cocked, simple physics tells us that 32mm objective divided by 10X gives you a 3.2mm exit pupil, not the best for a hunting scope dusk and dawn. I am glad you like yours.

I had the NSX 2.5-10 model with the 24MM OBJ. I loved it at the range but hated it in the woods. Low light, small eyebox and very short eye relief where all deal breakers. NF doesn't make a good lowlight reticle either. I know the reticle lights up but that's never impressed me. once the reticle lights up the image washes out.

It's a decent scope but for a hunting optic you could do much better for the price.

Terry

P.S. BTW,I'm a huge fan of the NSX full size stuff.

Those are your quotes. In them you didn't seem to care much about the difference in low light between optics.

I have a Nightforce. And have or have had at least one of every scope thus far mentioned. I determined that for me durability and reliability are THE characteristics that matter above all else.

I don't think you have to give up one to have the others.

There are hunting scopes that can provide all 3.

JM

+1

Sometimes physics plays tricks on you. A Minox 13X56 has an exit pupil of 4.3mm. A Bushnell 6500 4 1/2-30X50 when set on 13X has an exit pupil of 3.85mm and yet it lasted two minuets longer in a heads up test in low light. The Nightforce 12X56 on 13X lasted an aditional 16 minutes.

Maybe coatings have something to do with improved perfromance in optics. That's why we need to look through optics fro ourselves.

No doubt there may be. Which ones?

In any case, the question was about the NF which is an excellent scope. So is the Summit, and the Leica. But they do things differently.

Formadinkalosis,get a grip. Obviously I have insulted your prized possession, please accept my apologies I am sorry that I feel based on some rudimentary science that the NF 2.5x10 x32 is a mistake for a hunting scope.

IMO, science involves doing/testing. You did math...

OK I did math, 3.2 mm exit pupil at 10, is not a bright scope, science involves math all the time, its called physics!

I also have a couple 2.5 x 8 x 32 Conquests, same problem at 8X.

I do own a NXS 1-4 at 4X should have a 6mm exit pupil, is it brighter than a Conquest 3x9x40 set at 3X?

Well, you just named 2 of them.

John did you buy a summit?

Not yet. Bought a VX3 6x42.

The summit is on my list...with elevation turret. Just got to sell a few more slings. LOL

I owned the little 32mm NF but ended up sending it down the road. The optics disapointed me in the field and the reticle was near impossible to see unless lit in dim light or shadows.

It's obvious that I didn't make my point clear enough as you aren't getting what I was attempting to convey. It's easy to do the math to determine exit pupil. That alone will not determine which scope it brighter or IMO more importantly for hunting, bright enough.

OK you win, the 32mm objective Nightforce has magical coatings on it.

It might, I don't know never even saw one, but did not make that claim either. But, I'd bet that even with it's smaller exit pupil a new 32mm NF is brighter than a 40mm blister pack Bushnell/Simmons/etc that is 10+ years old been used hard and not maintained all that nicely. Yes, its an apples to oranges, but so is just basing the brightness of a scope solely on the exit pupil calculation. However, for the hunting I do, I'd bet either option would be more than adequate. But, then again I don't fret over some of the nits that you obviously do...

i tried onbe a few years back....bombproof construction, great adjustments but eyebox was lacking and reticle wasnt bold and illuminating it washed out the image....imo they need to incorporate the fire-dot type illumination that leupold uses

OK now I understand you just want to argue the principle of the thing and it has nothing to do with the original posters question about the 2.5 x 10 x 32 Nightforce. You don't own a NF 2.5 x 10 x 32, you don't own a blister pack scope (I hope) and yet you want to argue the NF is better! Perfect! Argue all you want, as a matter of fact I won't disagree with you! On the other hand at least I own a Night Force scope and have looked through it a time or two.

Didn't say the NF is better. You really need to work on some comprehension. I've used the NF as an example. THE only points I've really tried to make are as follows:
1. What you did was not "science" IMO, only math. That comment was mostly an apparently bad attempt at humor.
2. That exit pupil calculations alone are not the only factor in determining scope brightness.

PS- As an aside, I'll be taking two shotguns deer hunting next week. One wears a Leupold 4X and the other a blister pack 1.5X4.5. Both will see use.

Jimmy is making a pretty good point. A 32mm scope can't use as much magnification as a 40mm plus scope when the light gets bad. It isn't about a dim image, it's about no image at all, if it gets dark enough.
The 32mm will work fine in twilight. But not at 8X like a 40mm scope. At about 5X, it's image should be bright enough even on the darkest days. The downside is that the guy with the 40mm scope is going to able to see the same things further out because he's using more magnification.
Yes, this is from actually using such scopes at different levels of twilight. E

Exactly. It's a nice scope but it just isn't user friendly. Nightforce are fantastic scopes but thier claim to fame isn't light transmission. Jimmy was also spot on with his comments.

Terry

I got into NF scopes about 3 years back. They may not have "it" all but they got what's necessary. I'll always have several around. I do have the 2.5-10x32mm with the NP-R2 reticle. I love it. I can't figure out what folks mean when they say the reticle gets washed out when they use the illum. That particular illum is adjustable via the left side adjustment knob. It can be turned down quite low or up quite brightly. It's dead nutz accurate for turret twisters like myself. If it wasn't, I'd have gotten rid of it long time ago. Heavy, sure, but so are some of the other scopes mentioned above.

Alan

I agree, it's a rock solid scope. My problems with it are eye relief, eye placement at high powers and the fact that it's not a very bright scope. The issue with the reticle washing the image out can be experienced when you can barly see what you're trying to shoot with the scope, you can't make out the reticle because they're fine target reticles and not the best choice for lowlight situations. When you turn the reticle illumination on so you can see the reticle the image is no longer visible even at the lowest setting. This is a common problem with lighted reticle scopes and isn't exclusive to the NF compact models although they seem to suffer from it more than others.

I'm huge fan of the full size NSX scopes. They are tough as nails, have repeatable adjustments and the new "high speed" turrets have the best feel to me of any of the "tactical" scopes on the market right now. They are fantastic scopes at the range but for the money I can do MUCH better in a HUNTING scope. REPEAT, in a HUNTING scope.

These are just my observations from my time owning one of the NSX compact models and looking through a few others. If you can make it work for you and your situation that's great.

Terry

It was a serious question that I asked earlier because if there's something better, I'll use it.

In a hunting scope on a normal hunting rifle used for dialing with comparable size, durability, and consistency... Which scopes are better?

The S&B Precision Hunter is out due to single turn limitations. Swarovski is a no go simply because mine and everyone else's that I saw this year on students guns failed in two days.



Not a fanboy, and the 2.5-10x32 isn't my "favorite". But for using this scope to hunt with, it bothers me none to turn the power ring to 6x to "see" at twilight, and there is no scope that encompasses all that the little Nightforce does. The SWFA 3-9x is the only one I've used that comes close.

When you say the scope failed, what did it do ? Or stop doing ? E

Here's what I did, it may or maynot be to your liking. I sold my NSX compact and replaced it with a Leupold MR/T 2.5-8X36 and I'm much happier with it. It's brighter, has decent eye relief and as long as my head is behind the scope I get a good sight picture. The "ease of use" factor is very high with this scope and mine tracks well and returns to zero with no problems. The clarity doesn't match the NF but it's close enough that I consider it a small trade off. It's about the same size and lighter to boot. I know some don't like Leupold these day's but I've always found them in the running no matter what scope I'm in the market for.

I have no experience with the S&B Summit but if you can get an elevation turret installed on one I would think it would be a great choice too. If you're able to comprimise on size there are lots of great choices.

Terry

One with an elevation turret completely locked up, one where each click adjusted closer to 3.6 inches vs. .36in at 100 yards, one so inconsistent that it was unusable for dialing, etc, etc...

Which model Swaro gave all the trouble?

Habichts.

most all scopes fail after a while, some faster than others. My NF has been in once to the factory. So have several Conquests, Leupolds, and a Kahles.