Absolutely digging this new Nightforce NXS 2.5-10x42 !
They did a fantastic job:
FFP or SFP?..
SFP.
Easily the most non-useful review ever. I can see pictures on Google.
Man what have they got against ffp? I see a bushnell lrhs in my future.
Have you used an ffp reticle in this magnification range? At 2.5x the crosshair is so tiny that it’s nearly useless. To counteract this the manufacturer can enlarge it, but then it isn’t fine enough at 10x.
It comes down to personal preference, but I have actually used the vortex 2.5-10x32 and prefer my nightforce specifically because the reticle is sfp.
For range estimation below max magnification ffp is nice, but I rarely find myself doing that as it is. However, I do shoot quite often at 2.5x magnification, so I like an easy to see reticle.
Obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion, but ffp doesn’t work for me on a 2.5-10 optic.
Bingo.
What I have a hard time wrapping my head around is it seems everyone seems to need/demand a FFP 1-6/1-8 that has a daylight bright dot/reticle, yet conventional wisdom is 2.5-10 in SFP is good to go.
On a long range/tactical type of scope I absolutely want FFP.
I do not like FFP for lower power ranges for the reasons mentioned above.
To me it is all about intended uses.
That’s because you’re looking at completely different use cases, plus different illumination technologies. I see people demanding ffp and some manufacturers responding, but it’s hard to quantify a need for it. In any case, a 1-6 or 1-8 with daylight bright illumination can be useful in ffp because the illumination makes it usable at low magnification where the reticle basically disappears.
I can’t think of a good 2.5-10 off the top of my head that has daylight bright illumination, so when you run it at 2.5x the reticle is going to be too small in ffp, and there won’t be illumination to make up for this problem.
I, personally, think FFP is no good on anything less than 5 or 6 power. anything lower than this and you can’t range with it and obviously reticle specific, but in my experience at the low end it’s not useful as an aiming point. even illuminated, the FFP scopes I have seen are dim enough that they don’t help much and certainly not daylight bright, as most around here think of them…
sorry, didn’t read this before posting…
seems it’s unanimous…
I had a chance to look through the Leupy Mk6 1-6 today for the first time and I have to say I’m impressed. It was daylight aimpoint bright and the reticle seemed usable at 4x and up. I had read all the accounts saying the illumination is underwhelming but not from what I observed and there wasn’t any of the illumination flicker that I’d seen on a review video of the Mk 8 CQBSS 1-8 H27D (and apparently the mk8 will be available soon with the CMR-W reticle). So it seems my thinking that FFP wasn’t necessary for a 1-6 was made moot by the Mk6!
I can’t stand any 1-x optic. They generally aren’t very good scopes nor red dot solutions.
Someone a long time ago gave me the advice to get a 2.5-10x with an offset RDS. I would have save a lot of money had I listened way back then.
The CMR-W reticle isn’t very good for precision shooting, IMO. If stuck with Leupold, I like their TMR reticle MUCH better. For 3-gun type stuff where having two optics would place you into another class I can see the advantage of a 1-6 with the CMR-W. There generally isn’t much of a precision requirement either, just bang steel.
Exactly. I think most of the folks that think they need a FFP in a LPV, have never used one.
FFP is really retarded to use under 8x in most scopes.
Good to hear the positive feedback ccoker.
Looks like I will be buying this exact model for my incoming LMT MWS 
I am pleasantly surprised by the glass quality.
I have a Kahles and a SB I compared this against as well as a Leica 3-12x50
OH the million dollar question “have you used one”, it begs the question “SIR ARE YOU AN IDIOT?, WELL ARE YOU?” Yes used and owned bla, bla, bla. Still want what I want, and cant afford some of the other options out there even with mil pricing.
Say what?
haha… must be an encrypted message