Is Nightforce really worth the money comparatively speaking?

Comparing Vortex to DPMS or RRA is disingenuous at best.

Classifying race guns as "low tier" is also disingenuous, as their metric for comparison is different than that used for a fighting gun.

Remember the Einstein quote about fish climbing trees. Context is important.

Since you're looking at the 2.5-10 models, are you really sure you want FFP? I own a NF 2.5-10x32, and I previously owned the Vortex 2.5-10x32. I could not stand the reticle being so tiny at 2.5x on the Vortex, which is why I got rid of it. FFP, to me, is wasted on anything under 10x magnification.

If your requirements include parallax then you'd be looking at the 42mm objective version of the NF, but I don't have experience with it. Every review out there says it's better than the 32mm model in every way, though.

In the end, if the Vortex was SFP I would have kept it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Singlestack Wonder

Competitors use dpms, era, stag, and other low tier products in competitions. The product only has to last thru the competition event, not long term hard use.

---

In the PRS finale, they're all top shooters running $5k+ guns and another $2-4k in optics.

They generally have the money to run the best of the best and more chose Vortex than Nightforce.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slippers

Since you're looking at the 2.5-10 models, are you really sure you want FFP? I own a NF 2.5-10x32, and I previously owned the Vortex 2.5-10x32. I could not stand the reticle being so tiny at 2.5x on the Vortex, which is why I got rid of it. FFP, to me, is wasted on anything under 10x magnification.

If your requirements include parallax then you'd be looking at the 42mm objective version of the NF, but I don't have experience with it. Every review out there says it's better than the 32mm model in every way, though.

In the end, if the Vortex was SFP I would have kept it.

---

The NF 2.5-10x32 doesn't have a parallax adjustment? If so, it looks like the Vortex gets the nod. FFP or SFP isn't a deal breaker, so I don't really care either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slippers

Since you're looking at the 2.5-10 models, are you really sure you want FFP? I own a NF 2.5-10x32, and I previously owned the Vortex 2.5-10x32. I could not stand the reticle being so tiny at 2.5x on the Vortex, which is why I got rid of it. FFP, to me, is wasted on anything under 10x magnification.

---

You are right about the vortex being useless at low power.
It's not FFP that is wasted under 10x mag. It's the worthless designed reticles that are too thin to be seen at low power.
It's a shame manufacturers keep listening to the the guys who keep complaining if they can actually see the reticle.

Reticles can be designed so they can be useful from 1-6,8x, etc.
FFP has many uses at all power mags.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Onyx Z

The NF 2.5-10x32 doesn't have a parallax adjustment? If so, it looks like the Vortex gets the nod. FFP or SFP isn't a deal breaker, so I don't really care either way.

---

No, it doesn't have parallax adjustment. Only the 42mm version has it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koshinn

In the PRS finale, they're all top shooters running $5k+ guns and another $2-4k in optics.

They generally have the money to run the best of the best and more chose Vortex than Nightforce.

---

When money is no object, the top shooters aren't looking at Vortex's Viper line, though. :) They're looking at the HD Gen II, so people need to keep this in mind. The HD Gen II series is meant to compete against the higher end models from Leupold, NF, etc, and is priced accordingly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unreconstructed

You are right about the vortex being useless at low power.
It's not FFP that is wasted under 10x mag. It's the worthless designed reticles that are too thin to be seen at low power.
It's a shame manufacturers keep listening to the the guys who keep complaining if they can actually see the reticle.

Reticles can be designed so they can be useful from 1-6,8x, etc.
FFP has many uses at all power mags.

---

Fair enough. Vortex has had quite a few awful reticles in the past, not just on the 2.5-10x32.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koshinn

In the PRS finale, they're all top shooters running $5k+ guns and another $2-4k in optics.

They generally have the money to run the best of the best and more chose Vortex than Nightforce.

---

They shoot products from whichever sponsor pays the most.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Onyx Z

My requirements:
- 2.5-10 or somewhere in that range
- Illuminated reticle
- Parallax
- Uncapped turrets
- Very accurate and consistent adjustments
- Prefer zero-stop but not a deal breaker
- Relatively low-profile/light
- Very durable/shock proof
- Prefer FFP, but it's not a deal breaker if not
- Obviously the NF has better glass, but I care more about the requirements above than the glass since I know both are great

I know both of these scopes fit my requirements and everything I've read about the Vortex is positive and I know it's a great scope. But is the Nightforce really worth nearly twice the price?

---

The Nightforce NXS scopes are basically bombproof. That is much of what you are paying for. Yeah, the adjustments are also precise and repeatable, but a decent number of scopes offer that. The Nightforce offers you ruggedness and good adjustments. If you need or want those features, the price is reasonable, since it's probably the lowest priced scope that really offers the highest level of both of those.

I've owned that model PST. The glass was excellent, the illumination was excellent, and at 10x, the reticle was good. At 2.5x the reticle was nearly invisible, with or without illumination. Vortex is still figuring out how to make good FFP reticles.

I've read that that particular PST was engineered to be as rugged as a Leupold Mark 4. Whether that's a high or low standard I'm not sure. Even the biggest fans have never claimed it's as rugged as a NXS, and two seconds fingering both scopes will make this obvious.

I like FFP in higher magnification scopes, but it really isn't needed for most uses on a 2.5-10x scope. How likely are you to be measuring targets or holding windage at less than 10x?

Adjustable parallax is a mixed benefit at that range. Anything over 10x and I think it's essential, but lots of 9x scopes do fine without it. It doesn't hurt, but won't be missed much. The compact NXS puts the illumination control in that spot, which is a convenient spot.

My 2 cents:
-if you want or need extreme ruggedness, get the NXS
-if you don't, take a very close look at Bushnell's Elite Tactical 3-12x44, which has an illuminated reticle option (BTR-MIL) and a nice windage tree option (G2). Link below. This is also a FFP scope, with a reticle that's a bit too fine at 3x but great from about 4x-12x. Don't confuse this with the newer LRHS, which is an entirely different scope despite the make and specifications.

http://www.opticsplanet.com/bushnell...fle-scope.html

To me, having owned both, the Bushnell 3-12 is a MUCH better scope than the PST 2.5-10x32. The reputation of this line and that exact scope suggests that the Bushnell is also very rugged - not a NXS, but as rugged as other higher quality tactical scopes.

-the Viper PST 2.5-10x32 is fine from 5x to 10x, and is nice and light. Not so good at 2.5x. Although, FYI, the G2 reticle in the Bushnell is pretty fine at 3x also.