Help me decide - Nightforce ATACR F1 5-25 x 56 vs. Schmidt and Bender PMII 5-25 x 56

S

Spyderfire1

Regular
GunNutz
Rating - 100%
82   0   0
Location
West...
Looking for new glass for my mid range rig.
6.5 Creedmore pushing 140gr bullets.
Use will be for target steel, hunting and maybe some PRS style comps.
I’m stuck between the Nightforce ATACR F1 5-25 x 56 with the MIL XT and the Schmidt and Bender PMII 5-25 x 56 with the P4LF reticle.
There isn’t much of a price difference and I’ve looked through both. Glass and reticles are both very good with an edge to the NF a bit on the MIL XT for the tree type reticle.

Not interested in rebranded Japanese optics coming into Calgary now, just these 2 listed.

Thoughts?
 
If either fits, I’d lean towards the NF for ease of potential warranty service.
One of them must have a hue that’s more pleasing to your eye. I’ve tried a few high end optics that I really wanted to like, but they were more orange, or green or whatever. I prefer a bit more natural or blue maybe. Obviously not harsh colour, but just a faint hue.
 
BigRobb and Wallz, thank you for the answers so far. I need to get the scopes outside to see what you are saying about the Colors and how they work with my eye.
I agree on the reticle so far, just looking to see if anyone has a compelling reason to choose the SB for the glass quality or something.

Keep them coming guys, the feedback is much appreciated
 
I just purchased my first NF and was quite pleased, my only "concern" with the S&B would shipping it back to Germany for repair? so maybe a turret screw gets stripped? and it may?? be gone for quite some time?
NF in the US may be easier and faster to ship? Both are top tier scopes, so unless you want a specific reticle? I'm guessing either is OK, however I'd lean towards NF personally. Cheers
 
I've never used an SB but I have used the ATACR and quite frankly cannot understand the love some guys have for that optic. The eye box is tight, the windage turret is capped and the scope is short. Short scopes use harsh refraction angles which shorten depth of field. That results in an image that is simply blurred because of mirage while making mirage difficult to read. That is totally counter productive.

I would recommend Kahles 624 or 525 instead.

I have a 624 and have used a 525 and ATACR many times. I absolutely whole heartedly preferred either of the Kahles over ATACR .

SB might be great, but I've never used one so cannot comment on that.
 
Maple57 said:
I've never used an SB but I have used the ATACR and quite frankly cannot understand the love some guys have for that optic. The eye box is tight, the windage turret is capped and the scope is short. Short scopes use harsh refraction angles which shorten depth of field. That results in an image that is simply blurred because of mirage while making mirage difficult to read. That is totally counter productive.

I would recommend Kahles 624 or 525 instead.

I have a 624 and have used a 525 and ATACR many times. I absolutely whole heartedly preferred either of the Kahles over ATACR .

SB might be great, but I've never used one so cannot comment on that.
Click to expand...

While I agree on a few of your points, the OP only wanted to decide between the two he noted. I have an 525i, and also ZCO. I would pick the ZCO every time over the 525i, but the $$ also jumps up as well. That said there are a few on here in the exchange that would fit the bill. ZCO 420 with the tree reticle.

So between the two he noted, the ATACR is the better option.
 
Maybe PRS? If you don’t really need the tree ret, S&B. Mine is 10 years old, 4500 rounds shot with it, never skips a beat. Definitely get them both outside side by side and see which one you are more comfortable getting behind before you decide.
 
I am not a fan of NF, I find them to be over rated and there are better optics out there for the same money. I would look at the I O R Valdada recon, 4-28 or 5-35, if I am not mistaken. 40mm tube, comes with rings and a design that is outside the box. I have owned NF and S & B, the S & B I liked. Best of luck and looking forward to that stock for my 40XC-KS
 
To muddy the water, same price range you get can get Leica PRS (about 3700), color vibrance, eye box are better than NF.
or get Minox ZP5 (about $3400), still same price range but better NF
I think only worthy ones of NF line is NX8 which is relatively inexpensive. ATACR is over priced.
 
Spyderfire1 said:
Looking for new glass for my mid range rig.
6.5 Creedmore pushing 140gr bullets.
Use will be for target steel, hunting and maybe some PRS style comps.
I’m stuck between the Nightforce ATACR F1 5-25 x 56 with the MIL XT and the Schmidt and Bender PMII 5-25 x 56 with the P4LF reticle.
There isn’t much of a price difference and I’ve looked through both. Glass and reticles are both very good with an edge to the NF a bit on the MIL XT for the tree type reticle.

Not interested in rebranded Japanese optics coming into Calgary now, just these 2 listed.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I own both. Both are rugged and realable. I find the glass in the S and B to be superior. Depending on your approach to PRS(dialing or holding) The XT reticle is likely better.
But for hunting and target steel the S and B is tough to beat. Now my TT with Gen3 XR beats them both
 
Having owned the Atacr 5-25x56 but not the Schmidt, I’d say your choosing the weakest Atacr in the line up. Depending on application you may be better served with the 4-20x50 or definitely with the 7-35x56. One being smaller but very capable and the other only being slightly larger but with more mag up top. I find these two to be made of a different or say new optical formula from Nightforce. Also with both being able to parallax down to 10 yards. The 5-25 being one of the few Atacr still American made is nice but I found the one I had purchased to have a few quirks that the newer designs do not have. As in reticle jumping as power increases and a very dull almost gray image through the scope.I would have to agree above that a Kahles k series optic would be better then the 5-25. I sold mine for one and enjoyed both a Kahles k624i and k525i dlr for awhile. But recently switched the k624i for the smaller 4-20 Atacr and am very happy. The reticle is nicer (Mil-XT), the glass is much better (no CA, better contrast / colours), and I find the 12 MIL turret more defined then the K624 15MIL turret. So just something to consider with the newer designed Atacr. Unfortunately I have no first hand experience with the Schmidt to give any advice. Hope this helps!
 
I own both scopes and my personal opinion is strongly the S&B over the atacr. I find the eye relief and glass superior in the S&B. With that said you will enjoy both. I would take my Swarovski glass over both of them. Sadly they don’t provide a model truly for long rang shooting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom