About 10 years ago, i put a Swaro 6-24x50 on my long range rifle. great to plink with out to about 1100m. Apart from price, i cant say a bad thing about it. and as quality goes, i cant really complain about that! it has lasted about 15,000 rounds through the old 300 win mag without skipping a beat, has taken more knocks than any scope i've seen, and, sure it was expensive at the time ($2,100 AUD) and same model sells now for about about the same. Sure, it was expensive, but i considered it money well spent.

Recently i purchased a Nightforce NXS 5.5-22x56 for $3100AUD, thanks to "informative' marketing, and a number of people (ex leupold devotees) who were incredibly satisfied with the NXS.

at this point, feel free to discredit this post, as due to work committments i'm yet to zero said NXS on another magnum rifle, but as a test of curiosity, i did a purely optical comparison, side by side.

Note that the scopes had different and, in this test, irrelevant reticles, both were 30mm tubes, both on the same table at the same time, and looking at the same "target" (a neighbors TV antenna as the Swaro is on QD mounts and the NXS is not yet mounted) about 150m away, however I was able to "binoular" them to allow simultaneous viewing with some cardboard shims and stickytape. the biggest thing to note was that at the "same" magnifications, they werent able to match up. with the Swaro set to 20x, the NXS needed to be set to the max 22x for the same size image. the swaro had a deeper focal plane, and in the fading light of afternoon to dusk the Swaro performed better for under $1100 less. I will update this forum as more "data" is obtained, as the NXS has a greater area for adjustment, but for now it seems that the NXS is disapointing.

Not surprising, Nightforces come out near the bottom of the lists in most optical comparisons of upper end glass. In most of the tests I've read they are usually quite a bit behind Leupolds. I guess their tank-like construction must be their selling point because it sure as hell isn't glass quality or price.

Gatogordo
Have you ever used or even looked through a Nightforce? It is amazing that NF scopes have won more bench rest matches than any other scopes. Actually, at least at one time I believe, they won more than all other scopes combined. I could have bought any scope on the market, but based on reticle selection, durability, repeatability and price, I bought a Nightforce and have no regrets.

I would agree that their glass is not as sharp as Swarovski's. Their price isn't as high either. I was considering a swaro because their glass is so good, but not after I heard they went to a ten year warranty.

quote:

Originally posted by 338zmag:
It is amazing that NF scopes have won more bench rest matches than any other scopes. Actually, at least at one time I believe, they won more than all other scopes combined.

I don't know what BR matches you are talking about - unlimited, perhaps? For most the BR I have come in contact with, weight limits are very strict making scopes approaching NF weights less popular. Guess why there are next to no Euro scopes in BR either...

Are you sure you have your information straight??

- mike

P.S. here is an equipment lists of the 2009 IBS Nationals, of the top 10 shooters in each Grand Agg the scope count was as follows;

Heavy Bench (UL to some) - 9 Leupold, 1 March.

Light Varmint - 9 Leupold, 1 Weaver.

Heavy Varmint - 7 Leupold, 1 Sightron, 1 Weaver, 1 March.

Sporter - 8 Leupold, 1 Weaver, 1 March.

(source: www.benchrest.com)

quote:

I would agree that their glass is not as sharp as Swarovski's.

Well, no shit, what do you think I just wrote and what do you think the initial poster said while comparing them side by side?

Gato, the man was agreeing with you on the optical quality , but obviously likes NF

Leupold does have a lock on the BR stuff at every match I've been around, with their Mark IV LR or Mark IV ER T scopes.

In the Tactical arena, the Nightforces have a hell of a market share, and they have a VERY wide range of reticle options, I know for a fact that at least some of our Marine snipers have them on their 50 cal weapons, one of my best friends is one!

I have both of the scopes in question, and somebody like Stonecreek might can tell you why, but while both are very very good, the Swaros I have are 'better' optically to MY eye...I've been told by people more knowledgeable about optics than me, that it can vary from person to person--everybody's eyes can be a bit different I suppose.

I think the NF is awful good though, and it ain't a HUGE difference--to my eyes at least

greggus, it is interesting on your pricing, actually I haven't seen many folks carrying the Swaro PH 6x24x50 nowadays, not that they don't, just haven't seen them much it seems...when I bought my 2 NF's about 18 months ago, they Swaro's that were close in mag/obj size were more than the NF's.....I am a huge Swarovski fan, and really, all of my favorite hunting rigs seem to end up with a Swaro on them!

Fish:

The guy jumped all over me simply because I said Nightforce scopes didn't have the best glass and then agrees with me! At any rate, I said they were built like a tank. Their prices aren't cheap by any means so that isn't a selling point IMO.

Swaro is no longer making the PH line as far as I know. However, here is a damn good deal on a couple....AR classifieds.

I guess consolidation and the tight economy is catching up with them too. They make 3 lines now---Z6, Z5, and Z3, numbers indicating the magnification multiplier, BUT the 5 and 3 have one inch tubes with fairly limited windage and elevation adjustments IMO. One of their major faults as far as I'm concerned, but not a deal killer for normal sporting usage.

There isn't a helluva lot of difference between the optical quality of a $500 Leupold and a $2500 S&B, but there is a small difference. For most uses the differences are fairly insignificant but some people want the best, or what they perceive to be the best, and, if they've got the money, more power to them.

It has been my observation that as soon as someone plunks down $1500 or so or more for a scope, that cogitive dissonance sets in and it immediately becomes superior to all others.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Fish:

The guy jumped all over me simply because I said Nightforce scopes didn't have the best glass and then agrees with me! At any rate, I said they were built like a tank. Their prices aren't cheap by any means so that isn't a selling point IMO.

Swaro is no longer making the PH line as far as I know. However, here is a damn good deal on a couple....AR classifieds.

I guess consolidation and the tight economy is catching up with them too. They make 3 lines now---Z6, Z5, and Z3, numbers indicating the magnification multiplier, BUT the 5 and 3 have one inch tubes with fairly limited windage and elevation adjustments IMO. One of their major faults as far as I'm concerned, but not a deal killer for normal sporting usage.

There isn't a helluva lot of difference between the optical quality of a $500 Leupold and a $2500 S&B, but there is a small difference. For most uses the differences are fairly insignificant but some people want the best, or what they perceive to be the best, and, if they've got the money, more power to them.

It has been my observation that as soon as someone plunks down $1500 or so or more for a scope, that cogitive dissonance sets in and it immediately becomes superior to all others.

I didn't respond because you said NF didn't have the best glass. I responded because you said they come out near the bottom on most high end optical comparisons. That sounded as if you were making a statement based on someone's comparison other than your own. I bought my NF knowing that Swarovski had better glass and I could have bought one of those or any other if I had wanted one. I bought what I liked and am very happy with it.

Ease up lads! we're all saying the same thing!
as i mentioned i got the swaro about 10 years ago, and the z6 range do look nice, thouhg i decided to give the NXS a go due to their marketing: their ad

my concern was why the scopes had different "power" settings, and why the 20x on the swaro was equal to the 22x on the NXS! that seemed weird. I'd think if you had a 1kg box, it would weigh 1kg, or a 1 pint bottle containing 1 pint, so having different magnifications at the same power sems odd...

quote:

Originally posted by 338zmag:

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Fish:

The guy jumped all over me simply because I said Nightforce scopes didn't have the best glass and then agrees with me! At any rate, I said they were built like a tank. Their prices aren't cheap by any means so that isn't a selling point IMO.

Swaro is no longer making the PH line as far as I know. However, here is a damn good deal on a couple....AR classifieds.

I guess consolidation and the tight economy is catching up with them too. They make 3 lines now---Z6, Z5, and Z3, numbers indicating the magnification multiplier, BUT the 5 and 3 have one inch tubes with fairly limited windage and elevation adjustments IMO. One of their major faults as far as I'm concerned, but not a deal killer for normal sporting usage.

There isn't a helluva lot of difference between the optical quality of a $500 Leupold and a $2500 S&B, but there is a small difference. For most uses the differences are fairly insignificant but some people want the best, or what they perceive to be the best, and, if they've got the money, more power to them.

It has been my observation that as soon as someone plunks down $1500 or so or more for a scope, that cogitive dissonance sets in and it immediately becomes superior to all others.

I didn't respond because you said NF didn't have the best glass. I responded because you said they come out near the bottom on most high end optical comparisons. That sounded as if you were making a statement based on someone's comparison other than your own. I bought my NF knowing that Swarovski had better glass and I could have bought one of those or any other if I had wanted one. I bought what I liked and am very happy with it.

Like I said, cognitive dissonance.

Part of the German test:

Technology overview
(Manufacturer/Brand/Model) |(Length mm) | (Diameter mm) | (Weight grams) | (Reticle type)

* Burris Signature 6-24X44 | 418 | 25.4 | 620 | Various
* Docter VZF 8-25X50 | 416 | 25.4 | 796 | Plex, MILDOT
* Leupold VX-III LR 6.5-20X50 | 366 | 30 | 556 | Various
* Nightforce NXS 5.5-22X56 | 387 | 30 | 918 | Illum. Various
* Nikon Monarch II 6.5-20X44 AO | 377 | 25.4 | 602 | Various
* S&B PM II/LP double turn 5-25X56 | 422 | 34 | 1104 | Illum. Various
* Swarovski PV-S 6-24X50 P-Sport | 397 | 30 | 686 | Various
* Zeiss Victory Diavari 6-24X56 T* | 389 | 30 | 812 | Illum. Various
* Zeiss Victory Diavari 6-24X72 T* | 383 | 34 | 1034 | Illum. Various


Optical results:
Manufacturer |(Transmisson day%)| (Transmission Night %)| (FOV min. m/100m) | (FOV max. m/100m) |(Parallax 50-300m)| Diopter | (Focal Point De. 2nd plane)

* Burris | 88.4 | 85.1 | 1.70 | 5.40 | Ok | Not Meas. | Not Meas.
* Docter | 86.0 | 78.4 | 1.50 | 4.30 | Ok | 0.1 | 2 cm
* Leupold | 92.2 | 87.2 | 1.85 | 4.75 | No Scale | 0.1 | None
* Nightforce | 88.2 | 85.1 | 1.55| 5.90 | No Scale | 0.3 | None
* Nikon | 93.3 | 91.4 | 1.75 | 5.20 | Ok | Ok | 1 cm
* S&B | 93.1 | 91.0 | 1.65 | 5.40 | Ok | 0.1 | First Plane
* Swarovski | 90.9 | 88.2 | 1.75 | 6.10 | Ok | Ok | None
* Zeiss (56) | 92.0 | 88.8 | 1.68 | 6.00 | Ok | 0.2 | None
* Zeiss (72) | 92.1 | 88.8 | 1.70 | 6.10 | Ok | 0.2 | 1 cm

Just so you'll know, I've examined and looked through several different Nightforces over the years, shot one quite a bit on a friend's .300 WM all the while comparing them side by side with Leupolds, Zeiss, Swaros, and one S&B and that's exactly why I don't own any Nightforces and do own quite a few of the others mentioned.

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
It has been my observation that as soon as someone plunks down $1500 or so or more for a scope, that cogitive dissonance sets in and it immediately becomes superior to all others.

That is funny right there, don't care who you are! I think it's true too!

I personally don't agree with many of Gatogordo's political opinions but his statement on cognitive dissonance sure hits the button with me! LOL

I've looked thru some Nightforces and they all looked good to me. But I have to admit that I'm a Swaro Snob. Too many animals (dare I say the real trophies) come out at last lite. I want the best I can get to up my odds of tagging that trophy.

What it really boils down to is time. If Swaro gives you a better image for three more minutes of dusk, is it worth another $1,000?

I do not know why Americans either can't or won't make good glass.

The Gerries have always made far better optics--whether it is microscopes or rifle scopes.

Leupold scopes, for example, are very tough, but the optics stink.

It certainly is not true that we do not have technical expertise in this country or have people who appreciate good products.

Somewhere, somehow, whether it is in autos or optics, people have made the choice to make junk.

There certainly are exceptions. Products such as Surefire flashlights are made well and accordingly are puchased all over the world.

In the meantime, those of us who want either a good car or scope must contribute to the trade deficit.

quote:

In the meantime, those of us who want either a good car or scope must contribute to the trade deficit.

Over a few decades the USA have contracted their manufacturing out to the east ... and that brings a dependancy along as well as reduced employment for American citizens. Not to Mention 20m Mexicans taking up employment and social benefits.

American car manufacturers are in trouble and Japan has made massive inroads in this sector world wide.

Warrior

I would have suggest You to take the new Swarovski Z6i 3-18x50 or the 3-18x50 - You will love them! The optical quality has much increasead since your 6-24x50 -> it´s more brilliant and especially those high magnifition Swaros now have HD lenses
- You should at least have a look through them:

then sell that Nightforce before mounting....