Nightforce assistance/opinions need

[Smackdwn54]

Hey guys I'm looking to buy a nightforce 2.5-10-32 or 42.... I'm trying to figure out which one is all around better. The 42mm lens model just came out and it only has a few variances from the 32. They both have the same reticle options (older ones have npr2) I like the moar reticle. The only difference I'm seeing and reading is the 42 has a green reticle addition, parallax knob, and a larger front lens. The 42 is 1.5oz heavier and they both have the same field of view at 100yards. The 42 is also 250-350$ more expensive is it really worth the extra $??

I just recently purchased a LWRC repr 16" patriot brown. I plan on hunting and tactical shooting I also use a Flir T70 in conjunction with the day scope. If anyone has valuable input please help me out. The 42 also has a 50mm front objective lens with housing and will require a taller 30mm mount. This will increase the hight over bore and I'll have to make sure the t70 is close to siting even. Thanks any input is appreciated.. At this moment I'm looking at the 32 with moar and a larue mount for the price of a 42 without mount...

 

[Indirect Fire]

There a rep from Nightforce that is a member here....that is also a solid shooter. I imagine if he's around he will chime in.

 

[triharder72]

If you are a member on ar15.com, reach out to 00bullitt. He works for NF, is one of the best pure shooters I know and is a solid all around dude who just happens to be from Dville.

 

[Smackdwn54]

Thanks guys appreciate it.

 

[Twitch2120]

Better glass/coatings on the 42

 

[reed1299]

There is absolutely no difference in the glass. The two main differences are that the 42mm has the digital illumination with the option of switching between the red and green reticle and the fact that it has adjustable parallax from 25 yards to infinity. Also the light gathering capability of the 42mm is unreal not only due to the objective size but more so due to the exit pupil diameter being larger. While the 32mm is still an excellent optic, the 42mm absolutely blows it away.

 

[Laufen]

There is absolutely no difference in the glass. The two main differences are that the 42mm has the digital illumination with the option of switching between the red and green reticle and the fact that it has adjustable parallax from 25 yards to infinity. Also the light gathering capability of the 42mm is unreal not only due to the objective size but more so due to the exit pupil diameter being larger. While the 32mm is still an excellent optic, the 42mm absolutely blows it away.

There is no such thing as "light gathering", light will hit the lens and depending on the quality of the glass (impurities that remain), and the quality of anti-reflective coatings, a percentage will be transferred to the scope and to your eye. A larger objective lens will mostly net you a larger field of view. Brightness will only be moderately better at higher magnification if your pupils will dilate beyond 3.2 millimeters. The exit pupil of the 42 is 4.2mm. The average adult pupil will go up to 5, but less as you age. It kind of depends on how old you are. Any light that is projected on the outside of the pupil will be wasted. An 8 year old kid could benefit from a 50mm objective lens, a 50 year old will not.

Get the scope that fits the firearm. If you are taking shots at stationary targets I'd opt for the smaller and lighter 32mm, if more fov is necessary bump it up to the 42.

 

[ngcsugrad09]

The light transmission, slightly better resolution and better eyebox provided by the larger objective of the 2.5-10x42 are enough for me to recommend the 2.5-10x42. DigIllum can go either way for me as I don't really use the illumination and prefer the red anyways. I'm a die hard 2.5-10x24 fan (the old straight tubes), but the performance of the 2.5-10x42 is MUCH better than the x24 and x32.

If price is a concern, the 2.5-10x32 is still a great scope.

In my opinion, the 2.5-10x42 NXS and 5-25x56 ATACR are my two favorite scopes we make right now.