Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane
I don't think I missed anything. I own one and I use it and your "problems" are imaginary. Why is every critic of the FFP a non owner ? Lots of idle speculation going on in this thread. Personal choices, I understand. If you absolutely don't want 2" of the target blocked by the reticle at 1000 yards, then I understand. Just accept that the reticle is forever equally skinny and I would suspect hard to see with a SFP scope at ANY magnification. That sounds like something I would NOT like.
With a SFP, the view of the reticle is always the same, regardless of scope magnification. With a FFP one magnifies the reticle in proportion to the target. If you adjust the magnification to give you a comfortable field of view based on distance, size of the animal, speed it is moving at and situational awareness (like presence of livestock), why then would it matter what portion of the reticle you can or can't see ?
If the animal is so close that you are at minimum magnification and the holdovers on the reticle are too small to see, you could probably hit the animal by sighting down the barrel (thats what shotgun hunters do) yet the fact that I cant read a 2MOA tic mark on the reticle is somehow going to prevent me from making a hit at 6x magnification with a 1 degree "opening" between the broad lines of the reticle ? Unless I am mistaken, there are a lot of people who shoot to 100 yards and beyond using 2-4MOA red dot scopes where the dot fully obscures whatever is behind it. "Edit, OK, I got this wrong. Some of the well known brands have a 65MOA "ring" with a dot in the center."
Come on men. Is that the best you got ? I can't make the shot because 2" of my target is covered at 1000 yards ? I can't make a shot at 40 yards at 6x because I can't see the tics on my reticle within a 60MOA region ? Holey smokes...