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
  #274  
Old 03-20-2013, 09:44 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 615
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by westcliffe01 View Post
By the time the range is getting long, and by that I mean 350 yards + for small critters, most of us would be at max magnification provided mirage allowed it. No-one can argue that the subtentions on the reticle are unintelligible under these conditions.
But if you are at max magnification, what does an FFP provide that an SFP wouldn't?
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 03-20-2013, 10:15 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 15
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by orkan View Post
where you will have your magnification dialed back to increase FOV,
Interesting thread so far.........

Orkan or anyone with FFP experience,
i have a question that has been asked before but dont believe a definite answer was posted by anyone or maybe i missed it in the 40 + pages......

Lets say looking through a premier 3-15x50 gen2 xbr mil mil no illumination..... dialed back to low power for better FOV:
are the tick marks of the reticle visible enough for holdover in normal daylight? how about same question at twilight or dusk?
if they are not, then at what power do they become visible enough to use in daylight and low light?

This is an area of concern for me with FFP. i havent been able to borrow an FFP scope to actually field test in varying conditions.

Thanks in advance
John R
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 03-20-2013, 10:18 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,852
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by orkan View Post
Wind holds are the main advantage for long range shots, not hold over. Most of us dial elevation and hold wind. Hold overs would be the second thing in order of value, but a very close second.
Excuse me, I should have included "Hold Off's" as well as "Hold Over" But since the person I was discussing this with has stated he was talking 350 yards and rearely ever shoots past 450 I thought I was on task. They are both in reference to reticle calibration in either direction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cohunter14 View Post
I think this is the point that is being made...if you shoot the coyote at 50 yards, you are probably on minimum maginification. If you then want to take a shot at 400 yards and don't change the magnification, there is no help in the holdover if you cannot see the aim points.
Yes, this is indeed what we were discussing, quick shots at not too far of a distance.

Thanks

Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 03-20-2013, 11:08 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by jreagle View Post
Lets say looking through a premier 3-15x50 gen2 xbr mil mil no illumination..... dialed back to low power for better FOV:
are the tick marks of the reticle visible enough for holdover in normal daylight? how about same question at twilight or dusk?
if they are not, then at what power do they become visible enough to use in daylight and low light?
In daylight, they are useable at 3x. You'll lose them as light diminishes, but its difficult for me to describe where. I've taken a few low-light coyotes with the light tactical... but I have no real way to answer that question other than I've not had a problem in low light. At 3x, things are pretty fine. I'm a fan of this, as it offers a very fine aim point. At 5x, they are VERY useable. The GenIIXR reticle is pretty thin. The GenII Mildot that they offer is a thicker reticle, and is much easier to use on 3x when light starts diminishing.

Out here in south dakota the shots are not very close usually... so when I'm hunting and using a 3-15 light tactical... it generally sits on 5x or 6x most of the time. Below are some through-the-scope shots I just took out my office window. The building across the street has a pretty busy mural on it, and is about 40yds away. The human eye picks the reticle up WAY better (in the extreme) than these pictures allow for, but take from them what you may.







Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 03-20-2013, 11:23 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 180
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Orkan, Thanks for posting those pictures, It's a nice Reticle from what I can tell, but I'm just bothered about being able around the x5 setting with my eye's not that I'm going blind but I guess the only way to know the answer is to go and try one

Thanks again, john
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 03-20-2013, 11:25 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by mildot1960 View Post
I guess the only way to know the answer is to go and try one
Pretty much. That's the way it is with optics.
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 03-20-2013, 11:33 AM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Near Napoleon,MI
Posts: 997
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

The ability to use less than max magnification while still having the reticle being dead on. For me that would be anywhere from 8x to 16x with the 4-16. My 6-24 arrives this evening so have not had time to play with it yet, but I suspect it will be similar 10-24x should have the reticle readable and in low light I have the illumination to fall back on if needed.

I am not restricted to specific calibrations at specific magnifications, which are very hard to apply in a fluid predator hunting experience. Changing magnification is a relatively easy thing to do and there is nothing precise about it. Just dial to a point you are comfortable. On the other hand, dialing up corrections on the turrets one has to be exactly right and remain aware of where you have them if they are not on zero in the first place.

I agree that if every shot that you take is on max magnification, then the extra $200 for the FFP may not be worth it for you. I typically shoot with a different magnification every time and can never tell where the coyotes are going to show up. My process starts with the scope adjusted to match my binoculars field of view. Once I see something with the binoculars, then I pick up the rifle and go from there. If I know there are livestock in the lane of fire, I will not zoom in as much as otherwise to maintain situational awareness. If I am sure it is clear I will dial up as much as practical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cohunter14 View Post
But if you are at max magnification, what does an FFP provide that an SFP wouldn't?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do you archery hunt for elk?
YES - 34.59%
119 Votes
NO - 48.55%
167 Votes
Not yet, but I plan to. - 16.86%
58 Votes
Total Votes: 344
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:01 PM.


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