First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane Scopes

[ADMIN]

First off, to understand the differences between Front Focal Plane and Rear Focal Plane (Also called First Focal Plane [FFP] and Second Focal Plane [RFP or SFP], respectively) scopes, you should understand the basic mechanics of variable scopes.

In a variable scope, there is a main tube, and within this main tube resides another tube called an erector assembly. This tube extends from the power selector ring to just in front of your adjustment saddles. In the erector assembly resides a pair of lenses called erector cells. These cells move closer together or farther apart when the power selector ring is manipulated, effectively changing your magnification.
Read More...

This is a thread for discussion of the article, First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane Scopes, By John Childs. Here you can ask questions or make comments about the article.

 

[Mikecr]

Good explanation.
Only thing I would add is that some of us hold into wind by simple inches per hundred yards (IPHY). With this we need no more than a crosshair, or dot aim point(simpler the better).
Mentioned, and I'll add, anyone serious in LRH uses laser ranging, as it is way more accurate than bracketing on targets of unknown size, and at least as accurate on known target sizes.
For example, a groundhog standing in grass provides little clue about it's height so a LRF takes this out of the problem. Meanwhile, if I need to hold 12" into wind, there seems enough visual clues to do so.
Just works well for me.

 

[westcliffe01]

Seems like there are some double standards in this post. Too few reliable visual cues to range, but enough to know how many inches you are holding into the wind ? Thanks, but I will rather use my calibrated reticle for a wind hold...

Good explanation.
Only thing I would add is that some of us hold into wind by simple inches per hundred yards (IPHY). With this we need no more than a crosshair, or dot aim point(simpler the better).
Mentioned, and I'll add, anyone serious in LRH uses laser ranging, as it is way more accurate than bracketing on targets of unknown size, and at least as accurate on known target sizes.
For example, a groundhog standing in grass provides little clue about it's height so a LRF takes this out of the problem. Meanwhile, if I need to hold 12" into wind, there seems enough visual clues to do so.
Just works well for me.

 

[Qrachel]

Thanks for a simply and well written article ... I liked the way you parsed the <500 yard and beyond situations, suggesting the benefits based upon you personal experience.

Rachel

 

[cynicrit]

Thank you for explaining that. That was a very helpful article.

 

[winmag]

Thanks John.
There are a lot of misconceptions between the two, & it's nice to have an article for referencing if there is any confusion.

 

[TheLongRanger83702]

Since my BR2 rangefinder uses MOA I bought my scope with the MOA reticule too.