Leupold MK4 3.5-10x40 vs. Nightforce 2.5-10x32

[Cameron]

I need to get an optic for my new BCM SPR as it it currently wearing the scope from my bolt action a Leupold MK4 4.5-14x50. I was thinking the Leupold MK4 3.5-10x40 as I have a couple of Leupold scopes and have been happy with them, but I have noticed a lot of guys have been buying the Nightforce 2.5-10x32 for there precision ARs.

What is the advantage of the Nightforce over the Leupold MK4 scopes?

Do any of the NF scopes have illumination? I was thinking of the 3.5-10 Leupold with illumination and either the M1 (1MOA elevation) or the M2 (0.5MOA elevation) model and I noticed the NF had 0.25MOA adjustment. For fast BDC out to 800 I am trying figure the relative the value of the finer 1/4MOA adjustments. I also have a Leupold MK4 1.5-5x20 with M2 turrets on my Recce.

Anyone that has experience with the two I would appreciate your thoughts.

Cameron

[Belmont31R]

Nightforce is a better scope.



Get adjustments that match your scope. If the reticle is based on MOA get MOA adjustments. If its based on mils get the mil adjustments. I bought a Nightforce scope with a mil dot reticle but the adjustments were in MOA. It doesnt make any sense to have a mil based reticle and MOA adjustment turrets.



Oh and save up for a better scope than either Nightforce or Leupold....

[Cameron]

Nightforce is a better scope.

How is it better?

Cameron

[Belmont31R]

How is it better?

Cameron



Stronger build and better glass.



Leupold puts thin body walls on their scopes, and only average build quality. NF makes a stronger scope, and a little bit better build quality.


Im an admitted big fan of Euro scopes, and reason being is they are built like tanks, and the low light quality is far superior to NF or Leupold. I would honestly rather save for a few more months, and get a Euro scope than a NF or Leupold. Ive owned all of them, and think Euro scopes are well worth the money but only if you shoot a lot, and are more than just a hobby shooter. By that I mean if you are serious about your shooting its worth the step up in price but if you're in the soda can shooting crowd once every 2 months then no.


I sold my NF scope and got a SB 3-12X50. It has way better glass, and the built quality far exceeds NF and especially Leupold. As far as function of the scope NF is only just now catching up to what brands like Schmidt and Bender have had out for years. Things like the NF high speed turrets, FFP, mil/mil adjustments, ect.

[Cameron]

Stronger build and better glass.

Leupold puts thin body walls on their scopes, and only average build quality. NF makes a stronger scope, and a little bit better build quality.

Thanks Belmont, do you have a link to any of the speccs with regard to the wall thickness?

Cameron

[Belmont31R]

Thanks Belmont, do you have a link to any of the speccs with regard to the wall thickness?

Cameron



Check out the Sniper'sHide optics forum. They are optics guru's over there, and lots of honest no BS advice when it comes to what will work best for you, and the merits of each scope.


But no I don't think there is a single page you can look at that shows the tube wall thickness of each scope on the market.


A good indicator of how "beefy" a scope actually is would be the weight. The 4.5-14x50 Mark 4 Leupold is 22 OZ, and the 3-12X50 SB is 30 OZ. The Leupold is about half an inch longer. That means the SB has a lot more material for roughly the same length, magnification range, lens size, ect.

[Canonshooter]

A good indicator of how "beefy" a scope actually is would be the weight. The 4.5-14x50 Mark 4 Leupold is 22 OZ, and the 3-12X50 SB is 30 OZ. The Leupold is about half an inch longer. That means the SB has a lot more material for roughly the same length, magnification range, lens size, ect.

Not to be contentious, but a different POV...

If you don't mind ending up with very heavy rifle, the "built like a tank" optics are no doubt the best way to go. No matter how you slice it, a 30 ounce scope will add over 2 pounds to the weight of a rifle once you add in the required mount. Now add in the rest of your accessories and you'll easily end up with a 12 to 15 pound rifle.

Personally, I will sacrifice some durability/robustness for something that is easier on my back (not to mention easier on my wallet too). As Belmont stated, understanding the intended use/user should guide the decision-making process. Not everyone requires heavy, military-grade optics and accessories.

BTW, as long as illumination is not needed, I would look at the Leupold VX-3 3.5-10x40, which weighs in at under 13 ounces. I'm sure you can't drop it off a cliff or run it over with a Humvee like the S&B, but you won't give yourself a hernia trying to carry it.

[Belmont31R]

The VX3 lacks external adjustments which are greatly needed for an SPR.


If weight is an issue I wouldn't be humping an SPR in the first place.

[Canonshooter]

If weight is an issue I wouldn't be humping an SPR in the first place.

I used to swing plumbing wrenches and jack boilers up and down stairs for a good part of my life. Now that I've had a desk job for the last 15 years I'm lucky to jack myself up and down the stairs.

For us old (and not so fit any more) guys, every ounce counts.

[Cameron]

A good indicator of how "beefy" a scope actually is would be the weight. The 4.5-14x50 Mark 4 Leupold is 22 OZ, and the 3-12X50 SB is 30 OZ. The Leupold is about half an inch longer. That means the SB has a lot more material for roughly the same length, magnification range, lens size, ect.

You mean the NF right, not the SB?

You know I had a couple of IOR scopes and they were certainly "beefier, heavier" than the Leupold, but the things would never hold a zero and the Leupold has never lost zero.

I will check out the Sniper's Hide forum and see if anyone has any actual data on scope wall thickness etc.

As for the Leupold VX3 scope I am really after the MK4 series at least or the NF if it is better with bullet drop dials. The M2 BDC turrets work very well on my MK4 1.5-5

Cameron

[TehLlama]

I've been pretty happy with my Leupold 3-9x36mm with the ITMR reticle, but after getting a 3.5-15x NF, I already know I'll wind up selling the Leupy to fund a 2.5-10x NF.

[Cameron]

I've been pretty happy with my Leupold 3-9x36mm with the ITMR reticle, but after getting a 3.5-15x NF, I already know I'll wind up selling the Leupy to fund a 2.5-10x NF.

Why?

Everyone says it is better but can't really tell me why.

Thanks,
Cameron

[TehLlama]

Adjustment range, MIL/MIL availability, easier to use zoom ring (need to mount a 3GS cattail on my Leupold and see if that changes things), parallax adjustment, and adjustment range are why the NF is more appealing to me.

The ITMR and brightness adjustment are the strongpoints of my Mk4, but I need to try the NF Compact's brighness as well.
The slightly simpler M2 knobs and omitted parallax adjustment (shared with the NF Compacts iirc) makes it a pretty simple scope to get running with, but since I'm going with a NF for my bolt gun the commonality of long range optics is a big draw for me.

I'm honestly not savvy enough on refracting optics in general to really make terribly insightful comments about glass quality, nor have I really gotten to abuse my TS30 clone (though the Mk12's on buddies' rifles held up great), but if I get the opportunity to really stretch the legs on my centurion upper, the adjustment range of the of the NF will convince me to spend some cash and switch.

[Alaskapopo]

Why?

Everyone says it is better but can't really tell me why.

Thanks,
Cameron
Clarity, magnification range and durablity. I have owned about 8 Leupold Scopes over the years but I have had to use the life time warranty on 4 of them. The best warranty is the one you don't have to use. My Nightforce scopes have never failed and are much nicer when it comes to clairty and image sharpness. Also their magnification range is greater. 2.5-10 vs 2.8 to 8. 3.5 to 15 vs 4-12. Etc.
Pat

[Paul_Santiago]

I have been in this exact debate myself and I finally got to look through the Night Force and I like it ALOT! I am saving my pennies for the 2.5 to 10 for my next scope.

Paul

[cst]

I think the arguable drawbacks on the NF is the 32mm obj., lack of adjustable parallax for long range shooting, no MLR reticle available for that model..last I checked. No First focal plane and more expensive with the zero stop turret. Its a great scope for close range stuff...dont think I can use it for 700-1000 yd stuff.

The Leupold...is ok with the new M5 turret and TMR reticle FFP. Clarity is subjective especially when you comepare a smaller objective to a larger one sice brightness will effect your subjective perception of glass quality. Leupold has a parrallax knob too which helps making little bitty groups. THe TMR with FFP will make movers easier to engage mid to closer shots. The new M5 turret is 5 mils per rev. and on a .308 only 2 revs (and some clicks)to 1000yards.

nothing is perfect except for the S&B or even the Premier....but look at the price. THe military M110 uses the 3-10x M2 turret which is real nice too....

Every scope breaks even my S&B. My other NF is great and has been totally reliable. Take it for what its worth..

[Bolt_Overide]

Its really a question of money.

How much do you want to spend, and whats "good enough" for your needs?

[BaileyMoto]

Old post, but I'll bump this as I am torn between these 2 scopes as well. As others have mentioned, here are the advantages/disadvantages of each:

Leupold 3.5-10 m5 (Btw, I can get this for like $1089, ugh)

* TMR reticle
* FFP
* Parallax
* No illumination
* Much cheaper with mil discount
* 65 MOA worth of adjustment (whatever that is in mils)

Nightforce (about $1500 with options):

* Slightly more compact - 32mm objective and 1.5" shorter
* Illumination
* Zero stop
* 100 MOA of adjustment (whatever that is in mils)

Many claim NF is more durable and has slightly better glass. Many of the newer SPR's in the field are sporting the NF 2.5-10x24

Each has their advantages and it's making it a tough choice for me. If the Leupold wasn't so cheap, I'd go with nightforce w/o a 2nd thought. For you, I would suggest whatever suits your wants/needs better. The price and TMR reticle is what I personally like about Leupold. The zerostop and apparent quality/clarity edge is what i like about NF.

I think FFP for a 10x scope isn't really needed and many people (including NF, of course) claim that there is no need for Parallax adjustment with such a scope.

http://www.opticsplanet.net/leupold-mark-4-lr-t-3-5-10x40mm-long-range-tactical-m5-matte-front-focal-reticl-aebad.html

http://www.opticsplanet.net/night-force-nxs-2-5-10x32-w-10mr-zero-stop-elevation-rifle-scope-with-velocity-reticl.html


EDIT - on a side note, I recently bought a scope that covers almost all I want/need...but with slightly less 'quality' - The Bushnell 4200 3-12

* mil reticle with .1 mil turrets
* Parallax adjustment
* illumination
* FFP
* Bit more magnification