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
  #281  
Old 03-20-2013, 11:47 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 15
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

thanks for the reply and pics in #277 Orkan. Food for thought.....
John R
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 03-20-2013, 01:26 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Iron Range, Minnesota
Posts: 782
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

this has been an interesting thread to read...lots to think about, since the scope I am looking fot the next build I'm planning is FFP
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 03-20-2013, 04:23 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SW Montana
Posts: 4,433
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by westcliffe01 View Post


So if you shoot at 5x with the MOAR reticle the first tic for windage is already over 8MOA. So if you need 2MOA you can divide the "space" between the center and the first tic mark with the needed precision, instead of simply increasing magnification ? This at distances of 400-600 yards ? I personally don't know too many people who would choose to shoot with a scope on Min magnification at those ranges. Nor would I be capable of the kind of interpolation you are suggesting. At 8x on my 4-16 one can recognize the tic marks just fine and for 400 yards I would be on 16x. Field of view of the NXS at 100yds on 5x is 17.5ft thus at 400 it is 70ft. You are going to shoot at an object with a vertical dimension of 14-20" with the scope set to a field of view of 70-105ft ? By choice ? And that makes FFP scopes unsuitable ?
What do you think we used before variable scopes, I don't have any issue toasting something on 4x IF my reticle comes to the show, if I'm walking my scope is on min or if I'm sitting calling it on min and if I pull up and I have my cross hair why screw with it when I should be shooting.
__________________
High Fence, Low Fence, Stuck in the Fence, if I can Tag it and Eat it, it's Hunting!

"Pain is weakness leaving your body"
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 03-20-2013, 04:52 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Near Napoleon,MI
Posts: 997
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

So you just plain reject technology ? Clearly a Weaver 4x or 6x is a heck of a lot cheaper than a good FFP scope. You would deliberately choose not to dial up the magnification when it is at your disposal.

Sorry, if I have it I am using it. If you won't use it when you have it, it follows pretty well why you would not pay for anything additional.

The benefit of the FFP is that my graduations are on over a wide range of magnifications, but I will not claim that one can read them on Min magnification. Few hunters I have spoken to would choose to engage a target at 400-600 yards without increasing magnification when it is available. However, I am not forced to use a specific magnification or apply a scale to the reticle. Provided I can see it, I can use it. If I can't see the reticle and the target is not right in front of me, I am dialing up the magnification. It takes less time to do that than trying to hit on the second shot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigngreen View Post
What do you think we used before variable scopes, I don't have any issue toasting something on 4x IF my reticle comes to the show, if I'm walking my scope is on min or if I'm sitting calling it on min and if I pull up and I have my cross hair why screw with it when I should be shooting.
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 03-20-2013, 07:50 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Near Napoleon,MI
Posts: 997
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

I had my first look at the 6-24x50 Viper FFP tonight. It looks like at 24x the field of view is 50MOA or just a hair over. I was surprised that at 6x the reticle is far more legible than at 4x on my 4-16 (min magnification for both). At 24x one can no longer see the broad outer lines of the reticle, the central portion fills the field of view.

If I ever get my Remington back from Mc Gowan, I will be able to provide a more detailed report...
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 03-20-2013, 09:45 PM
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Iron Range, Minnesota
Posts: 782
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by westcliffe01 View Post
I had my first look at the 6-24x50 Viper FFP tonight. It looks like at 24x the field of view is 50MOA or just a hair over. I was surprised that at 6x the reticle is far more legible than at 4x on my 4-16 (min magnification for both). At 24x one can no longer see the broad outer lines of the reticle, the central portion fills the field of view.

If I ever get my Remington back from Mc Gowan, I will be able to provide a more detailed report...
Good to know. I currently have a SFP PST, got it because I'm used to SFP but am interested in the FFP Viper too.
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 03-21-2013, 08:24 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: London
Posts: 180
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Hi Y'all heres something that covers most of what we have gone through here



it covers the use's and FFP along with SFP

john
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
I currently have hunting preference points in the following states

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:29 PM.


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