Nikon FX-1000

Jun 18, 2017
31
5
8
#51
I would really like to put one of these on my new 22 to shoot NRL 22 matches this year. But I need to get to the range and figure out just how much of an issue the 50 yard parallax is going to be for some of the 25 yard targets they have in some of the NRL 22 matches.

I have several Nikon scopes and have always liked the glass for the price point and have had good luck with the durability of my 4 or 5 nikons I have but the 50 yard parallax may be a deal breaker for this application. So I may have to look elsewhere for this gun.

Michael
 
Likes: bman940

paysonjason

New Hide Member
Mar 10, 2018
12
4
3
#52
I think some of the Athlon may get you there, they have good glass for the money. It is their flagship Cronus BTR so I can go long range creed moor. I have a 20x fixed on my 22 lr for 100 yard shooting and love it (father in law uses 16x and gets 0.75 to 1.25 with his CZ 22lr at 100 yd). Both are the SWFA SS line. Good luck at the matches, that sounds like awesome fun !
 

deadnbrkn84

Gunny Sergeant
Jan 16, 2011
1,232
46
48
33
Portland, OR
#54
I would really like to put one of these on my new 22 to shoot NRL 22 matches this year. But I need to get to the range and figure out just how much of an issue the 50 yard parallax is going to be for some of the 25 yard targets they have in some of the NRL 22 matches.

I have several Nikon scopes and have always liked the glass for the price point and have had good luck with the durability of my 4 or 5 nikons I have but the 50 yard parallax may be a deal breaker for this application. So I may have to look elsewhere for this gun.

Michael
I think you'd be happy. The owner of the NRL looked at this at Shot and we could resolve targets at 25yd
 

Bender

Something witty here
Feb 12, 2014
2,384
1,808
113
Cheyenne WY.
#55
I’m watching the ffp Black closely. I have always been impressed with Nikon glass, for its price range, it’s great. I would love an ultra reliable long range scope offering from them.
 
Likes: bman940
Jan 31, 2014
9
2
3
Colorado
#56
Found this 6-24 tabletop review


Seems like it would be great value option in the illuminated 4-16 mil version (my pref) for my old 700P LTR in 308 cross use hunter/ work gun as long as the 50y parallax resolves a bit closer ... and it tracks ... interesting
 
Likes: bman940
Jul 31, 2010
172
26
28
59
Texas
www.nikonhunting.com
#57
I truly can't imagine anyone who wants to give this scope a go being disappointed. I have been using Nikon's BLACK X1000 for almost a year now and even in second Focal Plane I have not had any issues with shooting my 6.5's or .308's to 700 yards. I just haven't had the opportunity to go further,yet. I have put down hogs at 527 yards using the reticle in BDC form. I have also used the illumination 1 time on a cloudy frigid day to dispatch a mangy coyote at 200 yards with the 6.5 cm. Nikon's BLACK FX1000 should fit the requirement's a lot of you longrange shooter's have and for a great price.
 
Jun 18, 2017
31
5
8
#58
I think you'd be happy. The owner of the NRL looked at this at Shot and we could resolve targets at 25yd
That is excellent to hear I have had great luck with Nikon but I’ve had good luck with my vortexs and Athlons so I have been looking at my options. The Midas is on sale at Midway right now for a great price but I really prefer FFP and having the zero stop so if the new FX will work for those 25 yard targets I’ll have to give one a go and see how she looks.

Thanks for the info !

Michael
 
Likes: bman940

Walt

Private
Jan 17, 2006
23
29
13
Arizona
#63
bman940
Ok you got me. I just ordered the 6-24 MRad FX1000 for my 6.5 RPR. Maybe if these sell well you can add a value spotting scope with a FFP mil based radical to partner with the FX1000.
Get it in at the same price point and you will knock it out of the park again.
 
Last edited:
Jan 31, 2014
9
2
3
Colorado
#64
Trying to decide between this new Nikon 4-16 Illum. MRad and the well regarded 30% off Bushnell LRTSi 4.5-18 - realizing that the Bushnell will still be several hundred $ more ... apples and oranges? Different leagues? Either reticle will work for me, close enough on weights, fov, eye relief, adjustment range, etc. There is the question of low light - 44mm obj for the Bushnell vs the 50mm for this Nikon - giving the Nikon the edge for exit pupil mathematically - though glass spec and coatings could negate this to some extent? ... will go on the 700P LTR 308 I mentioned previously (has a NF 20moa rail already installed) - cross use - target /max distance 800 and under -- hunter /max distance 300 - antelope, mule deer, elk -- work gun /max distance 200 - not a competition guy ... oldish eyes, mid 50's kind - any thoughts appreciated.
 
Jan 23, 2014
136
47
28
Neenah,WI
#66
I'm from the buy once, cry once camp.... while I think you would be happy with the Nikon... with the 30% rebate till the end of Mach, for a few hundred more, you can get the Bushnell, again, you need to decide which features are important to you and choose based on those...

I would say the Nikon based on what your saying...
 
Likes: outwestrider

Primus

Gun Snob
Feb 13, 2017
377
87
28
Vancouver, WA
#72
You all are very welcome. Again our margins are thin on these because I know Nikon isn’t known in this world and I fought super hard to bring them to an incredible price. I did this so with all the features people just had to give them a shot. I know how pleasently surprised everyone will be and we can grab some market share.

If you haven’t seen it the new 4k yard rangefinder we released also just set a new bar for consumer rangefinder expectations. I’ve personally ranged trees at 3,280 and consistently at 2,700. It’s an incredible piece of gear especially for $449
Thank you for bringing this to the market. Just a small suggestion... Perhaps look into getting Nikon sport optics listed on expercity and lots of vets, .mil, industry folks will be more likely to give them a shot. Your competition already does and for lots of buyers, that discount it's a huge deal. Thanks
 
Likes: winniedonkey
Jun 21, 2013
30
9
8
#75
So my local range had the Vortex PST Gen 2 (3-15) in stock as well as the illuminated Nikon FX1000 (4-16 and the 6-24). I was able to spend some time looking through them side by side and these were my impressions:

A few things to note:

The Nikon I looked through was the MOA reticle for the 4-16 and the Mil reticle for the 6-24. The Vortex was the EBR 2-C mil reticle.
I did not have each scope mounted. I simply put them side by side on a counter top and looked through them.

"Glass":

With regards to optical clarity, there isn't much difference between the Vortex and the Nikon 4-16. Personally, I think the Vortex had better image quality when looking outside (I was looking at sunny leaves on a tree if that changes anything). I also think that the notion of optical quality is very personal so I'll leave it at that.

Illumination:

With regards to illumination, it isn't even close. The vortex, to me, was daylight bright and on the max illumination setting, it was easy to put the reticle into a leafy tree and not lose it. In contrast, the Nikons (both of them) are not, in my opinion, daylight bright at all. The 4-16 Nikon's reticle at 16x looked very dark when put against a visually complex background. On a pure white background, I would say that the Nikon's illumination setting of 10 is about equivalent to the Vortex's 7 or 5.

I will say, though, that another reason I greatly preferred the Vortex over the Nikon's illumination was that the Nikon reticle illuminates everything. It illuminates the actual reticle itself as well as the numbers. However, I found that at both lower and higher/max magnification, the eyebox of the scopes were unforgiving such that if you were not facing directly on, the illumination would have a 'smearing' effect that made the numbers and subtensions illegible, especially in the 4-16 version. I tried adjusting the parallax as well as the diopter but to no real avail. The Vortex did not have this issue or at least not enough that I noticed it.

I'm not ruling out the fact that this is just user error on my part. Like I said, I didn't have these mounted. I only had them on a countertop and so it was challenging to get a consistent eyebox every single time when looking through them. But if it is, in fact, an eyebox issue, it could have been due to the fact that the Vortex has a more forgiving eyebox.

Turrets/Magnification ring/Parallax:


With respect to the turrets, both the Nikons and the Vortex had equally responsive turrets. To be short, they had very satisfying clicks. The parallax knob adjustment on both the Vortex and Nikons were *very* stiff, however. Maybe it was because they are new, but all 3 scopes took some serious effort to adjust the parallax. Also, with regards to parallax, the Nikon rep in an earlier post mentioned that the NRL guys could 'resolve' targets closer than 50 yards. I think 'resolve' is the right word. At the closest parallax setting, objects closer than 50 yards were definitely blurry. If, for whatever reason, I was using this for short range work, it would be a struggle.


The magnification rings on all three scopes were similar. No noticeable difference among them in ease of turning. I'd still buy a scope lever for them.


My dumb thoughts, in summary:

Again, these are my opinions so take them as just one data point.

From Nikon's website they currently seem to offer illuminated and non-illuminated reticles for the 4-16x model at $750 and $650, respectively. The 6-24x model is only illuminated and $800.

I was considering the Nikon because I'm looking for a 3-15/16/17/18 hunting scope. And while I am waiting on that lottery win to get that Tangent Theta, the Vortex and the Nikon were the two in the running. But the Vortex wins it because with both reticles, I would need illumination to be able to confidently see them against dark/complex patterned backgrounds. Against relatively uniform and bright/white backgrounds I think they would be fine. I suspect that this is due, in part, to the fact that the glass at the top end for this range of scopes is not the best and so you lose some clarity and brightness. At 15x and 16x for the Vortex and the Nikon, respectively, the reticles are too thin to easily keep track of. Illumination is what makes them stand out against the background. And in that category, the Vortex wins, hands down. As I mentioned above, the Vortex is much brighter than the Nikon.

The Nikon 6-24x, I'm also pretty lukewarm about. The 'smearing' effect I saw as well as the fact that the eyebox on the Nikons (both of them) did seem less forgiving than the Vortex does make me a bit wary. But as I mentioned above, that may very well be due to operator error on my end. But even besides that, I prefer an open center reticle with holdover markings like the EBR-2C. This is entirely personal.
 

Bender

Something witty here
Feb 12, 2014
2,384
1,808
113
Cheyenne WY.
#76
So my local range had the Vortex PST Gen 2 (3-15) in stock as well as the illuminated Nikon FX1000 (4-16 and the 6-24). I was able to spend some time looking through them side by side and these were my impressions:

A few things to note:

The Nikon I looked through was the MOA reticle for the 4-16 and the Mil reticle for the 6-24. The Vortex was the EBR 2-C mil reticle.
I did not have each scope mounted. I simply put them side by side on a counter top and looked through them.

"Glass":

With regards to optical clarity, there isn't much difference between the Vortex and the Nikon 4-16. Personally, I think the Vortex had better image quality when looking outside (I was looking at sunny leaves on a tree if that changes anything). I also think that the notion of optical quality is very personal so I'll leave it at that.

Illumination:

With regards to illumination, it isn't even close. The vortex, to me, was daylight bright and on the max illumination setting, it was easy to put the reticle into a leafy tree and not lose it. In contrast, the Nikons (both of them) are not, in my opinion, daylight bright at all. The 4-16 Nikon's reticle at 16x looked very dark when put against a visually complex background. On a pure white background, I would say that the Nikon's illumination setting of 10 is about equivalent to the Vortex's 7 or 5.

I will say, though, that another reason I greatly preferred the Vortex over the Nikon's illumination was that the Nikon reticle illuminates everything. It illuminates the actual reticle itself as well as the numbers. However, I found that at both lower and higher/max magnification, the eyebox of the scopes were unforgiving such that if you were not facing directly on, the illumination would have a 'smearing' effect that made the numbers and subtensions illegible, especially in the 4-16 version. I tried adjusting the parallax as well as the diopter but to no real avail. The Vortex did not have this issue or at least not enough that I noticed it.

I'm not ruling out the fact that this is just user error on my part. Like I said, I didn't have these mounted. I only had them on a countertop and so it was challenging to get a consistent eyebox every single time when looking through them. But if it is, in fact, an eyebox issue, it could have been due to the fact that the Vortex has a more forgiving eyebox.

Turrets/Magnification ring/Parallax:


With respect to the turrets, both the Nikons and the Vortex had equally responsive turrets. To be short, they had very satisfying clicks. The parallax knob adjustment on both the Vortex and Nikons were *very* stiff, however. Maybe it was because they are new, but all 3 scopes took some serious effort to adjust the parallax. Also, with regards to parallax, the Nikon rep in an earlier post mentioned that the NRL guys could 'resolve' targets closer than 50 yards. I think 'resolve' is the right word. At the closest parallax setting, objects closer than 50 yards were definitely blurry. If, for whatever reason, I was using this for short range work, it would be a struggle.


The magnification rings on all three scopes were similar. No noticeable difference among them in ease of turning. I'd still buy a scope lever for them.


My dumb thoughts, in summary:

Again, these are my opinions so take them as just one data point.

From Nikon's website they currently seem to offer illuminated and non-illuminated reticles for the 4-16x model at $750 and $650, respectively. The 6-24x model is only illuminated and $800.

I was considering the Nikon because I'm looking for a 3-15/16/17/18 hunting scope. And while I am waiting on that lottery win to get that Tangent Theta, the Vortex and the Nikon were the two in the running. But the Vortex wins it because with both reticles, I would need illumination to be able to confidently see them against dark/complex patterned backgrounds. Against relatively uniform and bright/white backgrounds I think they would be fine. I suspect that this is due, in part, to the fact that the glass at the top end for this range of scopes is not the best and so you lose some clarity and brightness. At 15x and 16x for the Vortex and the Nikon, respectively, the reticles are too thin to easily keep track of. Illumination is what makes them stand out against the background. And in that category, the Vortex wins, hands down. As I mentioned above, the Vortex is much brighter than the Nikon.

The Nikon 6-24x, I'm also pretty lukewarm about. The 'smearing' effect I saw as well as the fact that the eyebox on the Nikons (both of them) did seem less forgiving than the Vortex does make me a bit wary. But as I mentioned above, that may very well be due to operator error on my end. But even besides that, I prefer an open center reticle with holdover markings like the EBR-2C. This is entirely personal.
Doesn’t the Vortex cost twice as much? I think if it tracks, it’s a knock out of the park at its price point.
 

magtech

DicksinCider
Feb 22, 2013
42
12
8
#78
It feels like nikon bought the pst gen 1 and rebranded it as their own. Same price, same mag range. Same pretty much everything, except some visuals. Hell, I'll sell you my pst gen 1 to you for $750 and you can save money.
 
Dec 6, 2017
77
24
18
#82
Just placed a order for a 6x24 fx1000 moa through optics planet. Got the scope and a set of Burris XTR signature rings for $800.
Hope that's ballpark for what everyone else is paying. Was gonna shop around , but thought that was a good enough deal to go ahead. Haven't been able to see one in person so I just took a gamble. Will give updates when I can. Directly comparing it to a 5x25 gen 2 viper on a 338lm that has held up good so far with same rings. This Nikon is going on a 300 RUM, so should take a similar beating recoil wise.
 
Likes: outwestrider
Feb 2, 2010
5
3
3
NE
#84
Just placed a order for a 6x24 fx1000 moa through optics planet. Got the scope and a set of Burris XTR signature rings for $800.
Hope that's ballpark for what everyone else is paying. Was gonna shop around , but thought that was a good enough deal to go ahead. Haven't been able to see one in person so I just took a gamble. Will give updates when I can. Directly comparing it to a 5x25 gen 2 viper on a 338lm that has held up good so far with same rings. This Nikon is going on a 300 RUM, so should take a similar beating recoil wise.
Looking forward to hearing your report on the comparison between the Nikon and Viper.
 
Mar 9, 2017
26
12
3
#88
Optics planet had it for $609 shipped 2nd day air. I couldn’t resist and picked one up. About $10 more expensive than 1800guns
 

bman940

Sergeant
Jul 31, 2010
172
26
28
59
Texas
www.nikonhunting.com
#89
There ya go, OP/1800gun's both giving you a "deal" if they have any left in stock. I'm sure as more and more guy's get their hands on them you will be reading range report's. Shameless advertising ? I'm just trying to let you guy's know the spec's,feature's and the price. I don't sell them.
 
Dec 6, 2017
77
24
18
#90
Optics planet had it for $609 shipped 2nd day air. I couldn’t resist and picked one up. About $10 more expensive than 1800guns
What the hell is "IT" ? A little more specific on the model . If you got a 6x24 for $609 , fair play to you. But I'm sure everyone here would like to know which exact model you bought. If it was a 6x24 that would be the best deal I have heard of yet, and would probably increase sales from people on this forum.
 

bman940

Sergeant
Jul 31, 2010
172
26
28
59
Texas
www.nikonhunting.com
#91
Agree, everyone wants to save some $. If I knew the OP code I'd pass it along, I know 1800gubbn's has a deal if you use friends10 for 10% off. Everylittle bit help's. I do alway's suggest talking to Sponsor's of the Hide as well, maybe they have some special deal's ?
 
Dec 6, 2017
77
24
18
#92
There ya go, OP/1800gun's both giving you a "deal" if they have any left in stock. I'm sure as more and more guy's get their hands on them you will be reading range report's. Shameless advertising ? I'm just trying to let you guy's know the spec's,feature's and the price. I don't sell them.
Just to be fair here , what's your definition of a deal, in percentage off msrp. We all know msrp is a gimmick to be manipulated behind the scenes(which is good for buyers). So what is your opinion of a good deal %wise off msrp?
 

bman940

Sergeant
Jul 31, 2010
172
26
28
59
Texas
www.nikonhunting.com
#93
I do not have a definiteion of a deal, if I want something and I can save some $ even if it's just tax/shipping it's all good. Again, if you know where you can get a discount / % off, pass it along.
 
Dec 6, 2017
77
24
18
#94
About 10 posts up , I posted I bought a 6x24 fx1000 and a set of Burris XTR signature rings for $800.92 to be exact from optics planet. I figured that was enough info for someone to decipher that is below msrp if they priced this stuff on their web site.juat to clarify, no code, I called in and talked to them
 
Likes: Bender
Mar 9, 2017
26
12
3
#95
What the hell is "IT" ? A little more specific on the model . If you got a 6x24 for $609 , fair play to you. But I'm sure everyone here would like to know which exact model you bought. If it was a 6x24 that would be the best deal I have heard of yet, and would probably increase sales from people on this forum.
Ah sorry! I got:
Nikon BLACK FX1000 4-16x50SF Riflescope w/ Non-Illuminated FX-MRAD FFP Reticle, Matte Black, 16512
Code: NI-RS-BFX1042-16512
Adjustment Click Value: 0.1 Reticle: Non-Illuminated FX-MRAD
Item Total: $609.49 ($609.49 x 1)

Free 2 day air shipping with code “2dayair” on optics planet. The 1800guns code for comparison was “friends10” I think.
 
Likes: bman940

pell1203

Full Member
Dec 27, 2007
960
111
43
Bellevue, WA
#96
Whoops! My original comment may have been somewhat misinterpreted by some as only searching for a better price deal. My apologies, this was not my intent.

My original comment was aimed (somewhat snarknilly, my apologies for that) at the posting of the purely commercial Nikon ad copy by bman940 who self identifies as a "Nikon Pro Staff" member on his signature line on all his posts. Don't get me wrong, I think it is wonderful bman940 is here on the Hide representating Nikon to discuss features, answer direct questions, help solve problems and participate in discussions regarding the product's value and performance. His input, knowledge and product expertise is welcomed and appreciated in this forum.

However, in my opinion, and my opinion only, I feel direct Nikon ad copy, such as was posted, should be separately handled as a commercial transaction between Nikon, SH, and Lowlight and not be introduced directly into threads by company representatives as a general policy.
 

demolitionman

Sergeant of the Hide
Feb 26, 2013
1,118
347
83
Ohio
#98
Can anyone take a picture of the ffp reticle at the lowest, middle, and max magnification range and post it? Or do a video upload of the reticle going through the entire mag range?
 
Dec 6, 2017
77
24
18
#99
I received my fx1000 6x24 moa yesterday, it will be going back immediately. The elevation turret is not up to standard on this particular scope. When you try to dial 1/4 moa you can easily slip to 1/2 moa. It doesn't have positive detents in between clicks. I tested this by not looking at the turret and trying to dial 1moa and was mostly ending up at 1.5moa, almost feels like every other click has half the resistance . The windage turret feels perfect and would be completely happy if the elevation turret performed the same.i will be calling Nikon Monday morning and hoping for a good resolution, which would be nothing less than a new replacement scope. I will not accept warranty work on a new scope that was defective when new, so I guess I will be testing their customer service. Which by the way requires proof of purchase to have warranty work performed according to the Warranty card that came with the scope. I am glad some of you are happy with your purchase, my ass is chapped that I'm not one of you. I didn't check illumination of the reticle, or even look at the sunshade as it didn't matter as I knew it was going back and I wanted it as close to new packaging as possible. If I get a scope in return that has a elevation and windage turret that feels as good as the windage turret on the particular scope that I currently have I will be satisfied for the price I paid for it. The only other thing I can add is I got 69 moa top to bottom on the elevation turret. I ran the turret up and down hoping the soft detents would improve before I give up on it, they did not. I have a viper pst gen 2 5x25 that I was going to directly compare it to, but I will refrain until I get a Nikon that I'm satisfied with in my possession. I can say my viper give me 82 moa top to bottom on the turret, but that remains to be seen if either one of them track all of that elevation
 
Likes: demolitionman
Mar 9, 2017
26
12
3
Man I'm sorry to hear about that. I finally got mine mounted and have not had a chance to shoot yet. My elevation and windage clicks feel the same. I closed my eyes and counted up and down various MRAD numbers and always came out to the correct value. I attached some quick pics of it on my Savage with a varmit profile barrel cut to 16.5". With Seekins low rings and a weaver rail it barely clears with the vortex defender front cap (rear cap is in the mail). I took pics from my basement looking out at 4x, 8x, and 16x. Sorry for the shit quality pics (poor camera skills, bad lighting), just use them for FOV comparison and not glass quality.

I only have a primary arms 4-14x for comparison and this scope blows it out of the water; glass quality and turret feel are incredible. The eye relief is also much better on the Nikon. I'll try to get some better pics of the glass when I go shoot.

Imgur gallery
 
Top Bottom