Nightforce NX8 1-8 and ATACR 1-8 LPV Reviews
- Thread starter Lepper
- Start date
I've got an NX8 mounted on my Stag 10. I've used it on my Modern Varmint a little bit as well. They are a really nice optic. 1x looks to me to be an actual 1x. The reticle is quite small but light up like a red dot quite nicely. Honestly I really haven't used it at 1x much, however I'll be using it on my MV this summer for 3 gun, so I'll have a better idea then. At 8x it is very clear, FOV is quite adequate.
The biggest issue with it is, like with all FFP scopes, the reticle centre dot gets to be quite big when you are at 8x. This can make precision shooting more difficult, as it is a 1.25 MOA dot. So for quick shots like in 3 gun, or hunting where your target is big, it is really an awesome reticle/scope. I could see someone not really liking it if they are shooting from a bench/rest more often than not.
The biggest issue with it is, like with all FFP scopes, the reticle centre dot gets to be quite big when you are at 8x. This can make precision shooting more difficult, as it is a 1.25 MOA dot. So for quick shots like in 3 gun, or hunting where your target is big, it is really an awesome reticle/scope. I could see someone not really liking it if they are shooting from a bench/rest more often than not.
I have an NX8 in FC-Mil. I am really liking using it as a red dot on 1x and I agree that it is a pretty big reticle on 8x for precision work . It should be fine for steel in 3gun competition though. It took me some adjusting of the diopter to remove the fisheye effect on 1x.
As for the Atacr 1-8 I am sure that would be awesome glass but with extra weight and bulk with the 34mm tube. Also a lot more money than the NX8. From what I understand the eye box is much more generous on the Atacr but after adjusting eye relief perfectly on my NX8 I find the reticle right where I left it when mounting my rifle to my shoulder.
I also like the exposed elevation turret on the NX8.
As for the Atacr 1-8 I am sure that would be awesome glass but with extra weight and bulk with the 34mm tube. Also a lot more money than the NX8. From what I understand the eye box is much more generous on the Atacr but after adjusting eye relief perfectly on my NX8 I find the reticle right where I left it when mounting my rifle to my shoulder.
I also like the exposed elevation turret on the NX8.
You realize that with FFP the reticle dimensions never change. That 1.25 MOA dot is still a 1.25 MOA dot at 8x. Both the reticle and the target(background) magnify at the same rate, thus their relationship(size wise) remains constant.
Yes, but what he’s getting at is true. As the magnification increases, the (we’ll call it) “perceived” size increases greatly. A 1.25 MOA dot looks pretty large when shooting at distance in comparison to some of the more precise options.
I’d agree with most of the above though, it’s great for shooting out to 300-400 yards from the “minute of bad guy” aspect but it certainly isn’t something I’d recommend as a precision optic.
Prior to the NX8’s release I had an NXS 1-4 and I found the NX8 worth every penny in terms of an LPVO. True 1x view, red dot brightness.
I’ve never gotten into the critical details of eye relief and FOV, all I know is it works for me.
If you’re on the fence between the NX8 and the ATACR 1-8 this is how I’d best break it down.
If you want a really well made optic, with the option to go 8x but still maintain a true “red dot” capability, go NX8
If you want more precision out of it and the red dot aspect is just a benefit, go ATACR.
Perception is not reality. the 1.25 MOA dot remains constant. The perception that the "reticle grows" is entirely wrong, but I see what you're saying. I think folks need to understand what the optic was designed for as well, and that goes for all optics. In this case the NX8/ATACR8 were designed for the SOF community, precision at the level some civilians desire is not the intended role.
Very much realize that, however, that's like saying the image in the eyepiece doesn't get bigger. Proportional to the background obviously it doesn't, but in absolute terms it does. No one is trying to precision shoot at 1x, so 1.25 MOA is great. At 8x, some folks might think they can, and I would say it is prudent to say that the reticle gets "bigger" to inform them, semantics aside.
Good point. In comparison the Specter DR 1-4 has a 1.5moa center dot at 4x. It's one of the things I disliked about it. At 200-300 yards the area covered on the target gets rather large. When shooting for grouping it didn't felt optimal.
So with a NXS8 the 1.25moa reticle will hide a little less target at the same distance. But the 8x magnification should allow longer shots. So if I shoot at 600y the reticle covers 7.5" of the target.
While not seeing my target as well I must have confidence that my impact will be in the middle of that reticle and not anywhere behind it.
Probably not a big problem for professionals and big game hunters but good to consider for target shooters.
Is it Burris or Trijicon that overcome this by putting the center aiming dot sfp and the remaining reticle ffp?
Burris XTR II 1-8 FFP uses a 10mrad illuminated circle and within it is a very fine BDC crosshair that is not visible until you get over 4x mag. Works fairly well.
This review has good pictures to give you more of an idea how it works.
http://opticsthoughts.com/?p=2050
That would be false. The entire magnified image increases in perceived size, to include the reticle. On an SFP optic the reticle then could be said to get smaller or shrink. Does that sound a little silly? The reality is that the image appears to grow while the reticle remains the same with SFP.
Hence why I said people need to understand what an optic was designed for before complaining about the performance shortcomings. Both the Elcan and the NX8/ATACR8 were designed for shooting people, not paper. If you're shooting for groups with a combat optic you will likely be disappointed.
Yeah I get that, but I'd argue explaining it to someone who has only used SFP scopes and never used a FFP scope, letting them know the reticle "gets bigger" is not a bad way to explain it. Especially when they are used to a reticle that, in relation to the target, does in fact "get smaller". And objectively speaking, the FFP reticle does get bigger. 8x bigger in the NX8's case.
Anyways, this is getting pretty irrelevant to the question asked. You're right.
I've found that method to work quite well.
