First or second focal plane?
- Thread starter freddogs
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
NEMTHunter
Well-Known Member
The only advantage is if you use the reticle to hold over for your shots and you do not want or have the time to make sure your zoom is in the right place.
other then that there is zero advantages. Infact there are disadvantages. One is shooting in low light conditions.
other then that there is zero advantages. Infact there are disadvantages. One is shooting in low light conditions.
bowhunter123456789
Well-Known Member
I have 2 first focal plane scopes on 2 - 300 win mag rifles. I like them for the fact that you can switch magnification and your lead and hold remain constant . With a second focal plane scope , when the magnification changes , the sub tensions change , so a certain sub tension is only accurate for a certain magnification. In other words ,a first focal plane is easier to use because you can dial up or down in magnification and it won't change your hold .
Basher42
Well-Known Member
Aside from a few low power and fixed power optics, all my scopes are FFP.
You have to weigh the primary use of the optic against its features. Some have reticles more suited to hunting/general use and are better suited to low-power use (such as the Bushnell LRHS line, now discontinued). But lots of European hunting optics are FFP and they work just fine. You can use a duplex/#4 type reticle to make rough range estimation and holdovers, so it can be helpful.
You have to weigh the primary use of the optic against its features. Some have reticles more suited to hunting/general use and are better suited to low-power use (such as the Bushnell LRHS line, now discontinued). But lots of European hunting optics are FFP and they work just fine. You can use a duplex/#4 type reticle to make rough range estimation and holdovers, so it can be helpful.
If you only shoot a duplex reticle and you don't use a reticle for anything (ranging, assessing how much you missed by, zeroing, holding for wind, holding overs, etc), and only dial for elevation and wind, then it doesn't matter. If you actually want to proficiently use a reticle for all of those things regardless of the power setting then that's EXPONENTIALLY EASIER/FASTER with a FFP scope.
The only advantage a SFP scope has, which is trivial for all other applications, is for F class/benchrest shooters since the reticle size doesn't change with a change in the magnification setting. Therefore it often allows for a finer aiming point. That's it. Nothing else.
As far as shooting in low light is concerned, with all due respect, that's just not true. What do you consider low light? Pitch black? With my FFP scopes you can shoot all the way up to the point that you would need a night vision device.
The only advantage a SFP scope has, which is trivial for all other applications, is for F class/benchrest shooters since the reticle size doesn't change with a change in the magnification setting. Therefore it often allows for a finer aiming point. That's it. Nothing else.
As far as shooting in low light is concerned, with all due respect, that's just not true. What do you consider low light? Pitch black? With my FFP scopes you can shoot all the way up to the point that you would need a night vision device.
Last edited:
BeaverHunter
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2017
- Messages
- 251
I had second focal plane scopes forever but my last couple have been turret scopes that are ffp. I really like the fact that the reticle hold overs are accurate at any power.
NEMTHunter
Well-Known Member
Again as post two says. The only advantage a FFP has over the SFP is if you use the reticle for holdover on your shots and you do not have the time to place the power ring were it needs to be. And let be honest. It only take a second or two to do that. So for hunting. If you have time to range and figure in the wind speed and run it through the ballistic calculator. Then you have time to set your power ring where it needs to be.
Now in certain completions FFP has the advantage as stated above. If you know your hold overs you can just go according. Just hold up regardless of your power and shoot.
AS for low light. Low light is just that low light. Black is no light. Moon light is low light. And yes a FFP is defiantly at a disadvantage in that situation. I spot light for coyotes and even makes shots just by the moon light. A lighted reticle will help the FFP do ok in that position. BUT on low power the FFP gets so small even shooting into dark timber you cant use it without turning the zoom up. And that depending on how far you are can be a problem.
Some People like them both the FFP and SFP. Some like just the one kind. Some only use the FFP for competition shooting and run the SFP for hunting. Some use FFP for it all. Some use SFP for it all. Does that make the one guy right and the other wrong? NO its just happens to be right for how that given person like it.
I just happen to prefer SFP over FFP. And some of the reasons are given above.
I did not bring up the ELR side of shooting. And that again is where the SFP shines. The OPs question was short range hence I did not bring it up. With a SFP you can extended your range by 15 to 30 MOA (and more) just buy changing the power of the zoom depending on the reticle. When you are trying to shoot as far as you can this does help. Another thing is the reticle is better matched for the target on higher power so you have a finer aim point.
As a side note one of my SFP scopes on 28x only takes up 1.047 inches of the target @ 1600 yards. Thats a fine aiming point. Some SFP scopes take up 1.047 inches @ 1745 yards. In ELR shooting the SFP is the best reticle.
They both have there place and usefulness. Pick the one you like and prefer and you will be happy. Try them both and use them both. Get the one you like and it will better serve you. It gets no more simple then that. I am not one of those guys that says it NEEDS to be FFP&Mils or SFP&mils or FFP&MOA or SFP&MOA. And tell others that what they NEED. Those that say that or short sighted even to blindness. Get what best serves YOU the shooter.
To the OP ( and anyone reading) if you take anything out of this post, look hard at the last paragraph above this one. Truly only YOU can answer the question. Why? This debate can and is the same as Ford vs Dodge (ram) vs GMC or chevy. When they ALL will get the job done. One just might be more what you the shooter are looking for. I do not think the deer or target care what focal plane your scope is. Only YOU will be the one that cares, because you will be the one using it. Sorry if that got long winded.
Now in certain completions FFP has the advantage as stated above. If you know your hold overs you can just go according. Just hold up regardless of your power and shoot.
AS for low light. Low light is just that low light. Black is no light. Moon light is low light. And yes a FFP is defiantly at a disadvantage in that situation. I spot light for coyotes and even makes shots just by the moon light. A lighted reticle will help the FFP do ok in that position. BUT on low power the FFP gets so small even shooting into dark timber you cant use it without turning the zoom up. And that depending on how far you are can be a problem.
Some People like them both the FFP and SFP. Some like just the one kind. Some only use the FFP for competition shooting and run the SFP for hunting. Some use FFP for it all. Some use SFP for it all. Does that make the one guy right and the other wrong? NO its just happens to be right for how that given person like it.
I just happen to prefer SFP over FFP. And some of the reasons are given above.
I did not bring up the ELR side of shooting. And that again is where the SFP shines. The OPs question was short range hence I did not bring it up. With a SFP you can extended your range by 15 to 30 MOA (and more) just buy changing the power of the zoom depending on the reticle. When you are trying to shoot as far as you can this does help. Another thing is the reticle is better matched for the target on higher power so you have a finer aim point.
As a side note one of my SFP scopes on 28x only takes up 1.047 inches of the target @ 1600 yards. Thats a fine aiming point. Some SFP scopes take up 1.047 inches @ 1745 yards. In ELR shooting the SFP is the best reticle.
They both have there place and usefulness. Pick the one you like and prefer and you will be happy. Try them both and use them both. Get the one you like and it will better serve you. It gets no more simple then that. I am not one of those guys that says it NEEDS to be FFP&Mils or SFP&mils or FFP&MOA or SFP&MOA. And tell others that what they NEED. Those that say that or short sighted even to blindness. Get what best serves YOU the shooter.
To the OP ( and anyone reading) if you take anything out of this post, look hard at the last paragraph above this one. Truly only YOU can answer the question. Why? This debate can and is the same as Ford vs Dodge (ram) vs GMC or chevy. When they ALL will get the job done. One just might be more what you the shooter are looking for. I do not think the deer or target care what focal plane your scope is. Only YOU will be the one that cares, because you will be the one using it. Sorry if that got long winded.
aushunter1
Well-Known Member
You haven't described what you are shooting?
If your trying to shoot a paper target at that distance don't forget that with FFP the reticle will enlarge & the more magnification the thicker the reticle lines will become.
If your varminting/hunting small game then it also could be a hindrance.
If your shooting MOA steel plate then not so much an issue.
Personally I like it because the sub tension values don't change but I have my FFP scope on a rifle I shoot out to 1000 meters.
If your trying to shoot a paper target at that distance don't forget that with FFP the reticle will enlarge & the more magnification the thicker the reticle lines will become.
If your varminting/hunting small game then it also could be a hindrance.
If your shooting MOA steel plate then not so much an issue.
Personally I like it because the sub tension values don't change but I have my FFP scope on a rifle I shoot out to 1000 meters.
bigngreen
Well-Known Member
For me FFP is just a wreck for hunting, I hunt from moving through timber to breaking out into large open areas, in the timber with the optic on lowest point I just have a fine cross hair with no reference points visible and need illumination so it stands out on dark game in timber, once I'm in the open I find them Ok in the mid up power ranges where I can see and use the reticle but it's still fine enough it doesn't look like it's the size of a fence post. I loathe FFP optics at long range at the top magnification, for me FFP just was no fit for my hunting!
Rick Richard
Well-Known Member
Twisting the power dial or twisting turrets is the choice. I have been twisting turrets too long so that is second nature to me. I Will stick with SFP.
lancetkenyon
Well-Known Member
Every scope I own is a FFP except on my 10/22 squirrel rifles. That is more to the point of the scopes are not as expensive, but still good glass.
As far as "can't see a FFP reticle on low power in low light", it depends on the reticle design. If it has heavy outer stadia, it is just like a fine duplex SFP reticle. Easily visible to my 48 year old eyes. If you are hunting on low power, you are more than likely hunting close and/or at moving targets. Plus, let's be honest, if you are hunting on 3x, you are probably hunting under 150 yards or even closer. You bracket the heavy outer stadia on a vital zone, not shoot for an individual hair on the shoulder.
As for "the reticle gets too thick on max power", the reticle covers no more on 25x than it does on 5x. A .1MIL line covers .36" on 3x or 24x. The target grows with the reticle. The same .5" target dot is the same at 3x or 25x too. And if you are shooting at deer sized game at 1000, the same .1MIL line covers 3.6" in width of the game animal, again, at 15x or 25x. A .25MOA line on a SFP scope will cover 2.5" @ 1000 yards on whatever magnification setting it is true at. Usually max mag, but not always. But on half power, that same reticle line now covers 5" @ 1000.
FFP subtensions are always constant. Awesome for wind holds, and you don't have to be on max magnification so you can get a wider FOV.
FFP scopes USUALLY have much better reticles available, and most true top tier optics are FFP. There are certain models available by some that are SFP, but not nearly many.
FFP scopes are usually heavier, and more expensive however. But again, most top tier makers build FFP scopes. That goes without saying on why a lot of the FFP price tags are higher.
Unless you use your reticle subtensions for wind holds, and even holdovers, a FFP is not really needed. No use getting a duplex in a FFP scope, as that totally defeats the purpose of FFP.
For me, it is a no brainer in a LR hunting scope. I rarely hunt, even long range, with a scope set to max power. To be honest, my longest shot on game to date (1365 on a pair of coyotes), was on 17x in my 5-25×56 Premier. I did, however, hold 2.2MILs wind hold for two 1st rounds hits and two deer killers eliminated. The 17x allowed me a wider FOV to watch coyote #2 trot off after the first coyote dumped. Then, adjust over and take advantage of the dumb one that stopped about 40' to the right. Again, with a 2.2 MIL wind hold.
To each his own. I will not ever own another SFP scope on a hunting rifle. Too many advantages in FFP for me. Not enough disadvantages in my opinion.
As far as "can't see a FFP reticle on low power in low light", it depends on the reticle design. If it has heavy outer stadia, it is just like a fine duplex SFP reticle. Easily visible to my 48 year old eyes. If you are hunting on low power, you are more than likely hunting close and/or at moving targets. Plus, let's be honest, if you are hunting on 3x, you are probably hunting under 150 yards or even closer. You bracket the heavy outer stadia on a vital zone, not shoot for an individual hair on the shoulder.
As for "the reticle gets too thick on max power", the reticle covers no more on 25x than it does on 5x. A .1MIL line covers .36" on 3x or 24x. The target grows with the reticle. The same .5" target dot is the same at 3x or 25x too. And if you are shooting at deer sized game at 1000, the same .1MIL line covers 3.6" in width of the game animal, again, at 15x or 25x. A .25MOA line on a SFP scope will cover 2.5" @ 1000 yards on whatever magnification setting it is true at. Usually max mag, but not always. But on half power, that same reticle line now covers 5" @ 1000.
FFP subtensions are always constant. Awesome for wind holds, and you don't have to be on max magnification so you can get a wider FOV.
FFP scopes USUALLY have much better reticles available, and most true top tier optics are FFP. There are certain models available by some that are SFP, but not nearly many.
FFP scopes are usually heavier, and more expensive however. But again, most top tier makers build FFP scopes. That goes without saying on why a lot of the FFP price tags are higher.
Unless you use your reticle subtensions for wind holds, and even holdovers, a FFP is not really needed. No use getting a duplex in a FFP scope, as that totally defeats the purpose of FFP.
For me, it is a no brainer in a LR hunting scope. I rarely hunt, even long range, with a scope set to max power. To be honest, my longest shot on game to date (1365 on a pair of coyotes), was on 17x in my 5-25×56 Premier. I did, however, hold 2.2MILs wind hold for two 1st rounds hits and two deer killers eliminated. The 17x allowed me a wider FOV to watch coyote #2 trot off after the first coyote dumped. Then, adjust over and take advantage of the dumb one that stopped about 40' to the right. Again, with a 2.2 MIL wind hold.
To each his own. I will not ever own another SFP scope on a hunting rifle. Too many advantages in FFP for me. Not enough disadvantages in my opinion.
Ok. I see what you're saying. My solution to that has been the same. Turn down the magnification and turn on the reticle.
