Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Nightforce 2.5-10x42 NXS

Howdy

Anybody know how consistent the eye relief is on this scope? Does it change considerably when going from min to max magnification like some scopes?

Any input is appreciated

Thanks

Quite good to my eyes. I did not notice a significant change. Best hunting scope in its class, imo.

Sorry, but this is a little off topic. I owned two of these scopes and I did not have any problems with eye relief on either one. But I didn’t like the short range of parallax adjustment. My scopes could adjust parallax down to a very short distance(way less than 50 yds), but parallax adjustment would max out just north of 300yds. I sent one scope back to Nightforce thinking there may be something wrong and asked if the range could be adjusted. Didnt make much difference. A second one that I bought was exactly the same. Very limiting ability to correct for parallax if you plan on shooting longer distances.

When I compare that to other scopes I own like SWFA and Bushnell LRHS, those scopes have very wide ranges of Parallax adjustment. I’m not sure what’s different in the designs that would cause this limitation.

Just some added information in case it’s important to you.

I have one, I put it on a 308 Winchester. I don't shoot this rifle much past 400 yards. With this scope I haven't noticed any issues.

I've found the 2.5-10x42 NXS to be very parallax sensitive. I think Nightforce really focuses on resolution and in this model the parallax across power ranges, focus settings, and distance is very touchy because of it. Not unusable, but it seems to me that with any change in range or change in power at a specific range, the parallax has to be adjusted to it for the most resolution. In some cases it makes a big difference in regards to not only parallax but also clarity of the image. I've not noticed this (resolution of image, not parallax) to anywhere near this extent in other scopes. I don't remember having a parallax problem with it at 500 but I've also spent a lot less time shooting it at that distance than at 300, were I spend most of my time.

I noticed the same simply looking through one at varying ranges out the back window. The 3-10 SHV is easier on my eyes although no zero stop, fixed parallax etc.

Yes, I think the 3-10 SHV is much easier on the eyes in use. I guess it can be called greater depth of field...it doesn't need the fine tuning of the 2.5-10.

I now have the Compact on all my prime hunting rifles and agree it does need a little bit more attention to get the parallax dialed in. But so far when I've actually been focused on aiming at game to take a shot its been fine. I still really like the scope over any other options in that weight & magnification range.

Never an issue. I have a few. If I can have my way I would scope all my GP rifles with one! Best all around scope!

I think it's a great scope and I really like them. The parallax issue can be worked around. I think the touchy parallax is the result of scope design that allows very fine resolution....maybe some of the best resolution for any 10x scope. If they came in FFP with a well designed FFP hunting reticle I'd likely own more of them than any other scope. Everything's a trade off in scopes, especially at the compact size of the 2.5-10x42 NXS.

This is good to know. Thanks for the input

I like mine and I'll probably get another. The focus does seem a little sensitive, the glass is only about as bright as a $400 VX-3 (still more than good enough for any legal shooting light), the illumination control is slow and annoying, the eyebox is slightly tight. But at 20 ounces I dunno if you can do better.

I also have an SHV 3-9...which seems easier on the eyes and weighs the same and has way better illumination control, but dialing is clunky, the clicks feel terrible, there is no zero stop, supposedly you can't leave the turret covers off, etc.

If you're weight sensitive it's probably the best choice. If you don't mind another 6-8 ounces there are better choices.

Thats the first I've heard about a tight eyebox. Its one of the easiest to get behind scopes I've ever used.

I've considered them for my last several purchases, ended up with Leupold 5HD every time. At the $1,000 price point, the 5HD appears to be the best fit for my use.

i have a 2.5-10x42 on a Remington 700 - 7 Rem. mag. works just fine for me .

Have been running two NF NXS Compact 2.5-10x42 for 6 and 9 years. One has the MOAR reticle and the other the Velocity 600 (High Velocity version). I LOVE them! Maybe because my aging eyes don't see what others see but I have no issues with the glass quality. I'm a shooter, hunter and reloader, not a glass aficionado. Just yesterday, at the range I swapped my big, heavy NXS 5.5-22x56 from my new custom 300 PRC running the Barnes Bullets 208 LRX at 2830 fps to the smaller 2.5-10x42. This load is more MV or medium velocity so I could not use a 200 yd zero. Computing with Shooter ballistic app I needed to be 1.8" high at 200 yds. Using the 600 yd hash mark, I proceeded to put 5 shots into 6" with perfect elevation. Then, a number of years back, using the MOAR reticle I killed a bull elk at 950 yds, with 3 minutes of legal light remaining and a snow squall coming in so I had to use the illumination to see the reticle clearly. IT WORkS!!!

My only hesitation is when you have a mix of spikes in with cows and have either a cow tag or spike tag and 10x isn't enough to ascertain which is which when it comes time to pull the trigger. Thus my current hunt for something with a bit more power and that, I believe, will be the Zeiss V4 4-16x44 or 50 with the ZMOAi-T30 Illum #64 Ext. Elev. Ext. Locking Wind. Riflescope.

Alan

Well...I wish I felt the same. I like what the scope does for its weight and I'll probably get another when the mil versions come back in stock.

The nxs 2.5-10 sort of sucks. I’ve had a few of them, the reticles is BS and hard to see, the eye relief is lame. SWFA 3-9 is a superior aiming device.

i like mine. great scope