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
  #50  
Old 03-04-2013, 11:38 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SW Montana
Posts: 4,255
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Soooo, I've been searching reticles on some FFP optics in an effort to see what gives, and try to find something that is close to what I know works well in the SFP optic and hopefully a decent price point that the average dude could afford.

The Nightforce NP-R1 seems to be the bench mark for me, shot it a bunch at long range and it's proven very good for me and others with a reticle of .062 MOA, I also shoot the Vortex HS LR and at about 8-900 yards I start having to compromise a little and at a mile it takes ingenuity for me to get the kind of hold I want some of which is the reticle thickness and some is glass quality but the price point is excellent and it functions decent but nothing that will blow anyone's socks of, reticle is .156 MOA so these are my two benchmarks that I'm very familiar with in SFP.

The Nightforce NP-R1F1 comes in at .205 MOA.
Vortex Razor EBE-2B is .150 MOA and EBR-2 at .200 MOA.
Vortex Viper PST EBR-1 is .180 MOA.
Vortex HS LR comes in at .100 MOA.
Premier 5-25 Gen2XR is .075 in/hundred yards.
Premier 3-15 Gen2XR is .114 in/hundred yards.

I found it's kinda hard to find the reticle specs on most sites, Kahles M6 I just could not find though the optic is interesting. Tried to find a few others I know of but could not but it would be nice to have a better list.
The Vortex HS LR actually is interesting because it's one of the finest FFP reticles I could find and it has a decent price point.
The Premier 5-25 has the thinnest reticle of any FFP optics I could find which is cool but still thicker than the NP-R1 or even a SFP PST with a .060 thick reticle.

This question still comes to my mind and that is if I bought say the Vortex HS LR FFP and I'm rolling into my hunting area and run into elk that are needing to die and it's low light early in the morning in the timber am I going to be able to find my reticle at 6x or am I going to be trying to fumble the scope and get it turned up in power, which will make target acquisition difficult, to see my cross hair. I know from experience that I can crank my my HS LR SFP DOWN, improving target acquisition, and get a clear reticle on a bull.
__________________
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
  #51  
Old 03-04-2013, 11:58 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

In that instance, I'd have illumination turned on before I set out. FFP reticles at low settings tend to take on the appearance of a duplex in low light, without illumination.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 03-05-2013, 11:26 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 249
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

In the (albeit entirely out of the *self*) interest of seeing this discussion continue, I hope both parties will stick strictly to the facts while avoiding excessive criticism and/or refrain from taking potshots - even in the midst of frustration/angst and general pissed-offed-ness.

Thank you.

Also, thank you "Ishootkittens" for posting your question - it is timely and likely to be in the back of many readers minds - especially as these technologies become more affordable. I know i've been curious about this as well.

To both Broz and Orkan: I respect both of your experience, knowledge and expertise on this topic. This has been and i hope will continue to be, a very informative *discussion*.

I appreciate the situation when we have our own well-thought-out opinions on a matter, substantiated with fact and positive, practical experiences which support our position. I have been and continue to be in similar situations, though not specifically this topic.

We can all line up our own team of experts, successes, performance benchmarks, etc etc ad nauseum to support our position. However, it is entirely possible at the end of the discussion to remain on opposite ends of the idea continuum. Is this all bad? To have choices is a good thing.

We have greater fights ahead of us than ffp vs sfp - our entire access to guns is being assaulted - lets keep our energies for fight focused elsewhere.

In the hope of seeing this dialogue continue, it's important to realize it's possible for folks to have preferences based on their very personal response to/success with either ffp or sfp reticles/optics. There seem to be excellent potential applications to either method and possible short-comings as well.

Those of us without the depth of knowledge, experience, expertise or opportunity to gain these depend on those of you who do. We look to you all to learn from since most of us don't have the resources to examine, personally, all the options here.

Thanks for your time in contributing thus far.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 03-05-2013, 11:31 AM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 249
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigngreen View Post
This question still comes to my mind and that is if I bought say the Vortex HS LR FFP and I'm rolling into my hunting area and run into elk that are needing to die and it's low light early in the morning in the timber am I going to be able to find my reticle at 6x or am I going to be trying to fumble the scope and get it turned up in power, which will make target acquisition difficult, to see my cross hair.
Neither. You're going to shoulder your lever action 45-70 and punch a huge hole through that 7x7's vitals because your Vortex scoped bolt-gun is in your drag-bag strapped to your pack!
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 03-05-2013, 01:20 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Alaska
Posts: 3,227
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

I'm learning here. From what I can tell, cost is a major difference in selection of a FFP scope versus SFP scope. I currently spend about $800/scope. Most I've ever spent on a scope is $1300. I currently have no intentions of spending $2000 per scope, let alone $3000 or more per scope. I do like the option of using the FFP reticle for hold-offs at all powers. Very simple in concept and application. But the apparent reality, based on self-set cost limits, is that I'll be using SFP scopes until and unless the FFP versions don't impose the cost premium that currently exists.

No company is going to sell a lot of $3000 scopes, unless they're selling to the military. Which means they have to make more money per scope sold to stay in business. That much I understand. I won't pay that premium. This is likely why there aren't, and won't be, as many FFP options as SFP options. There isn't enough demand for those comparatively high cost scopes to support a lot of manufacturing competition and options.

Last edited by phorwath; 03-05-2013 at 02:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 03-05-2013, 01:43 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huron, SD
Posts: 306
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

Quote:
Originally Posted by fmajor View Post
We can all line up our own team of experts, successes, performance benchmarks, etc etc ad nauseum to support our position. However, it is entirely possible at the end of the discussion to remain on opposite ends of the idea continuum. Is this all bad? To have choices is a good thing.
I agree. The more options there are, the better.

I think we finally stumbled onto the core issue. Broz is an expert in the ways of SFP. It's what he's comfortable with, and can get it done in any situation with SFP optics. It's tried, proven, and effective. I too can make a SFP optic do what ever I would need to get the shot done.

FFP is new, and the more expertise someone has with SFP the less appreciation they have for FFP.

I can not get Broz to concede anything good about FFP. While I can concede several good things about SFP. Namely as it pertains to low magnifications. When I say things like "I can get specific number-based holds on any power." I'm met with "why the hell would you want or need that" types of responses.

This is born out of our different shooting habits and experiences. Sounds like Broz is a guide. You couldn't pay me to do that job. I would hate dealing with people's idiocy while hunting. I've seen it first hand, and want no part of it. I spend a great deal of time competition shooting, and also long range hunting.

Broz's way of old, works flawlessly for hunting, I'm sure. Yet will never carry over and be as effective as FFP in a tactical rifle competition setting. If it were, the top tactical competitors would have SFP optics instead of FFP. My way, with FFP optics, is perfectly suited to tactical competition AND long range hunting. I have a few dozen kills on big game from 500-800yds to prove it... with my personal best being a nice oregon mulie at 945yds. Sounds like Broz has a great deal more experience in big game hunting than I. I've never even shot an elk. Whitetail, antelope, and mulies is the extent of my big game experience. I have some nice ones on the wall to prove my chosen gear works just as well as Broz's when it comes to taking game at distance. He maintains his claim that FFP is inferior to SFP for ELR, and we will absolutely remain on opposite ends of that argument. Outside of this website, it's Broz that would be taking the beating, instead of myself. ;) This is due to there being more shooters on here doing it his way, than mine. Why wouldn't there be? FFP is relatively new, and as a result, far fewer people using it. On other sites, in other circles, that would be reversed.

Keep one thing in mind. It's very frustrating to listen to people claim a certain thing doesn't work well, when I and many others have seen it work well for years. I'm not saying SFP doesn't work. I'm simply opposing those claiming FFP doesn't work. It does, and it works quite well. For some, it works better.

Think about that for a second. If you are using something, and it works great, and others claim it doesn't work... what conclusions could you draw?

1) They don't know how to use it.
2) Theirs is broken, or not the right one.
3) It works, but they simply don't "prefer it" and will claim it doesn't work anyway, for various reasons.

If people have used FFP optics, and don't like it. I'm fine with that.

It's when they start claiming that FFP optics can't get it done as well as SFP. That's when I have a problem.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 03-05-2013, 03:36 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 497
Re: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane

I think you sort of hit the nail on the head...in 'other circles' most of us who use SFP would be the minority. The problem is those 'other circles' are those who are doing the tactical competitions that you are talking about. This circle here is long range hunters, big difference. The FFP makes perfect sense for tactical shooters, but doesn't make the same amount of sense for hunters. There are very few circumstances I can see where I wouldn't be dialed up to full power if I was calculating my shot and hold-over amounts. However, there are far more circumstances where close shots might happen and the reticle will matter. On top of that, the cost for a good FFP makes it even more difficult to justify going that route. If it were the other way around and SFP was the more expensive option, I think a lot of people would be using the FFP. It is difficult to justify the extra cost of the FFP when you might be gaining something, but you are losing something as well and, in the end, it is probably not going to put more meat in the freezer. Just my $.02...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Current Poll
Do You Shoot Rifle Competition?
YES - 34.09%
732 Votes
NO - 65.91%
1,415 Vote
Total Votes: 2,147
You may not vote on this poll.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:24 AM.


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