Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Hunting > Long Range Hunting & Shooting

Long Range Hunting & Shooting Nightforce Optics


Reply

First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #92  
Old 03-06-2013, 06:07 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,811
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by domestique View Post
Most of where I hunt is central PA. Shot distance is typically 15 yards to 400... Hardly long range! I started reading this forum a year ago while planning an Elk trip to Gunnison Colorado. I'll be the first person to call myself a newbie when it comes to long range shooting.

No, I typically don't range while hunting with a reticle. A laser range finder is always with me.

Honestly I'm still searching for the perfect scope. I've used Leupold, Bushnell, Vortex, and shot friends Night Force, S&B, and US optics.

For hunting (especially at my short ranges, I could get it done with any scope. My passion however is shooting unknown distances on steel gongs at my buddies farm anywhere from 400 to 980 yards out. This is why first focal plane Scopes work for me in my particular situation.
Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it. So you mentioned a couple years ago you switched from SFP to FFP, what brand and model FFP did you go with that is working so well for you?

Thanks
Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 03-06-2013, 06:58 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it. So you mentioned a couple years ago you switched from SFP to FFP, what brand and model FFP did you go with that is working so well for you?

Thanks
Jeff

I still in between scopes right now. Right now I am between either the S&B 5-25x56 in H37, US optics ER-25 5x25 in an H-25, Premier 5x25 in the Gen 2 XR, Nightforce BEAST (if reviews are good) or even the Vortex Razor HD in EBR MRAD if I decide to go cheap...

past experiences with a Bushnell 4200 FFP, and a Sightron SIII have made me want to pony up the cash and cry once.


The ideal scope for MY applications:
 
-FFP
-Zero stop
-Horus based reticle or similar
-Illuminated reticle
-MTC turrets
-MIL/MIL setup

So, to answer your question I do not have a FFP scope that I have settled on yet.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 03-06-2013, 07:00 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,811
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Ok, now I understand completely.

Thank you
Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 03-06-2013, 11:00 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tucson AZ
Posts: 224
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

I suppose I cannot stay out of this thread any longer ,,,,,,

when you are hunting and you are relying upon your reticle for holdover, windage calculations etc ,,,, you WANT it mounted in the front focal plane so that all that stuff is accurate regardless of the magnification the scope is adjusted to ,,,,,,,,

you have a trophy animal in front of you at some distance ,,,, he is moving or not going to stand there all day ! ,,,,, your guide is hoping you will move your ass and get the thing down ,,,,,,

the LAST thing you want to have to worry about after range and wind calculations is what power the damned scope is set to ? ,,,,,,,

I have been preaching this since 1997 ,,,,, few people have listened I think ,,,,, get a 4-16X50 or 5-25X56 Schmidt & Bender scope with front focal plane mounted mil-dot reticle and many of the scope issues in the field will immediately become irrelevant ,,,,,

My old-fat-man opinion of course ,,,,,,
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 03-07-2013, 09:25 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

I knew there had to be someone else on here taking advantage of FFP optics. Never guessed it would be someone with a name that recognizable.

Thanks for standing up to be counted John!

I'll have to disagree on the S&B though. I much prefer the Premier's. All the benefits, none of the shortcomings. (tunneling)
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 03-07-2013, 10:04 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,811
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Just curious as to whether Orkin and John mostly use only hold over on the reticle for both elevation and windage? And would you only use the reticle in this fashion for a shot past 700?

I dial most everything and only use a reticle hold to correct for follow ups unless I was way off on my dope.

I wanted to do a little test yesterday and the weather was crappy, I hope to get it done today and if so will report results tonight here.

Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 03-07-2013, 11:04 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by Broz View Post
Just curious as to whether Orkin and John mostly use only hold over on the reticle for both elevation and windage? And would you only use the reticle in this fashion for a shot past 700?
I'll let John take the lead on this one Braz. I'm sure the results of your little test will serve to back your opinion on the matter. Just as I could perform test after test illustrating why FFP is more capable.

I feel the case for FFP has been well demonstrated. It's up to the individuals to decide what they want.

1) "FFP reticles are too thick at high power."
Well some can be. Doesn't mean all are. I can quarter a 6" square at 1125yds, or a deer easily at 3000yds. Don't seem to be too thick for me.

2) "FFP reticles are too thin at low power."
Well no, not actually. When coyote hunting, my optic sits on 5x. It's lowest magnification. Works fantastic.

3) "I don't need my holds to be correct at all powers."
Well I do.

4) "I don't have mirage, so I don't need to dial back my magnification"

I'm glad for people in this situation. I routinely shoot in heavy mirage that often precludes any magnification over 18-20x. Yet it sure is nice to have the extra 5x for days when its clear.

I compete in tactical rifle competitions, and frequently win. I hunt coyotes and big game, up close and far away. I compete in 3-gun competitions, and frequently win. The same rifle I compete with, I also hunt with, and it wears FFP optics.

What I can do, many others can do, and are doing. Yet you don't find many top rifle competitors running SFP optics. If FFP were such a handicap, why is everyone using it to win? A fad? No I don't think so.

I've been in far more compromised situations while competing, than I ever have been while hunting. I assure you. What makes FFP optics an excellent choice for competition, is exactly what makes them an excellent choice for hunting.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do you archery hunt for elk?
YES - 29.88%
49 Votes
NO - 54.88%
90 Votes
Not yet, but I plan to. - 15.24%
25 Votes
Total Votes: 164
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC