I'm about to purchase a new Nightforce NXS to go on a 308 bolt gun for hunting at ranges from 100-600 yards. The gun is a relatively lightweight unit, and I'd like to stay with that theme on the optics as closely as possible. Fairly positive that Nightforce is the choice for me. I'd like to think I could get away with the 2.5-10x42, but I am worried that I might end up wishing I had gone with the 3.5-15X50, even though it's much bigger and heavier. Opinions? What's the minimum magnification you're comfortable taking medium sized game with at 600 yards?

Either will do just fine. If weight were a concern, I'd choose the 2.5-10.

Yup.

If it were me, I'd say to heck with a few ounces and get the 3-15X

10 ounces heavier, 4 1/2" longer for the 3.5-15x50.....

X2

That's a lot of coin for a hunting scope. But I would go 3-15 if you will honestly be looking to kill at 600yds

Take a look at this thread for through-the-scope images of 10x and 15x magnification on a 600 yard target. There is a significant difference. If you're shooting over 400 yards, I think the extra magnification is worth more than half a pound of weight.

Link

this, and the one below it. 600 is way out there.

The idea that you need more and more magnification runs rampant on this forum. Of course you can hit a 8 inch target at 600 yards with a 10 power scope. The optics are up to task. Now if he is trying to count points on a deer, that is another story all together.

The better question should be, is the shooter willing to put in the work to make these kind of shots? No amount of magnification will make that shot for you. It always comes back to the basics. Know the exact range, a rangefinder is preferred. Dope it. Make a proper wind call. And finally, execute the fundamentals of shooting.

Fully agree with you, not 600 yards but have used scopes set at lower power levels like 2.5 to 6 on yotes at ranges out to a little over 300 yards. Deer sized game my longest shots are a little over 500 yards, all shots made that far were with 3-9 power scopes set on max setting. Have missed one elk that was about 570 yards, the guide with the range finder said it was 490, had killed a pronghorn the day before at 509 so held the same for the elk, scraped hair off brisket and hit meat portion of off side leg on slight quartering away shot. Had I held for 560 that would have been a very nice 5X5 bull.

Have a 2.5X10 scope on the way for a 6.5 Grendel build, plan on having fun with it shooting longer range out to 1k. Figure on game will keep it inside 400 yards. 2.5-10 with good glass like is in Night Force Scopes should be no problem killing deer out to 5 or 600 yards if the shooter and rifle are up to the task of making that length shots. Now like said above it counting points is part of the task then go for higher magnification. I just do not like extra bulk and weight on a light weight hunting rifle.

I've always been a 300 yard guy, but it's time to take my game to the next level. I am well aware of what it takes to put rounds on target at 600 yards, and I have a lot of work to do before I'm able to do so. This equipment will be used in conjunction with a pair of Leica HD-B 10x42's. My default is going with as little magnification as I can get away with.

Their scopes are to,dang big most the time. If I had to add 4" and half pound I woukd save and he the atacr fi in a normal size or buy another brand with a decent weight. Jmo

10X will certainly do it.

Yesterday evening I did my usual cold bore shot at distance, I picked the 600 yard plate. I shot it on 20X.

Why? The more magnification, the more disciminatory you can be on you hold on target. It also reveals what you are doing wrong to cause a flubbed shot.

I'm also kinda considering a Swaro Z5 3.5x18x44... It's only 16oz and I think it might also be a pretty solid repeatable scope. More magnifocation than I need, but it's so light it's a non-issue.

Just remember, all these scopes you have mentioned are sfp. That means the swarovski brh has basically a fixed 18 power reticle, same goes for the other two at 10 and 15x. Anything under max power and those reticles are only useful as a cross hair.

Unless you were considering the nightforce f1, of course.

You are wasting the all important field of view when using these high powered optics. Especially inside 600 yards.

6.5x47, I admit that I'm fairly ignorant on this subject so far, but I'm planning on dialing for elevation, and keeping the reticle as clean as possible. Ranging with a reticle is not something I'm interested in just yet. Swaro has a 4W reticle that has 2 moa marks to hold for windage. So I'd only have to zoom all the way in if I was shooting far enough to have to hold for windage. Anything other than that, I can just dial for the elevation.

Understanding that 600 is the max, how much or your hunting is going to be out that far?

I would say 100-300 is where I take most of my shots. I just want to be proficient out to 600. And I'm almost positive that I wouldn't attempt a shot at a nice deer at that range until I get A LOT of practice. But I do get frequent opportunities at hogs at that distance. It'll be good practice.

The last used feature of a Mil or MOA reticle is for ranging. You have to know the size of the target for it to work.

The real use is for elevaion and/ or wind holds. I understand wanting a "clean" reticle, but unfortunately no one is making a Mil reticle for windage only. The windage line is always used, the elevation line is for when you don't have time to dial, which does occur sometimes.

They are still useful but the subtensions change. All that needs to be done is take that into consideration. An example would be the 2.5-10 at 10x the subtensions are true at 5x they are 1/2 value.

At 5X the subtensions are double value.

Dee, as noted they are a double value at 5x. You see how easy it is to mess up. Also, you have to actually measure your reticle to see where that double value actually lines up. It may not be exactly where your mag ring says is 5x. This, of course is assuming the 2.5-10 mag range.

This is all a recipe for disaster under stress. For all conditions, outside of a tidy square range, the reticle is only usable at whatever magnification the manufacturers decide is appropriate. Usually this is at max magnification. I actually have one 4-14 sfp scope where the reticle is only accurate at 12 power. Silly, I know.

Crews, as noted by JG, the last thing you want to do with a reticle is try to range find. Use the leica for that, simple and easy.

Sorry for assuming you wanted the 4w reticle in the swaro. I sometimes forget that there are still people in this world who use moa reticles. To each his own, I just don't see them very often. A fixed 18 power reticle will show excessive mirage at times, and will kill your field of view. I like to have a wide field of view to watch the surrounding environments. This is where a ffp scope really shines.

On the wind. It's always going to be a factor when shooting at 300+, and it seems to always be changing. If nothing else, I'm watching through my scope just to ensure there is no wind. You will come to understand this as you get more range time at distant targets.

Exactly right. ^^

I'd probably put a fixed 12x and call it good.