Don't get too discouraged; there are peeps that think FFP are for military applications only. All of my scopes are SFP except for my last two purchases.
I'm nowhere near tacticool but I'm enjoying my FFP. It boils down to preference.
Good luck!
Reticle hard to see at low power on FFP scope
- Thread starter CleanShot
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Don't get too discouraged; there are peeps that think FFP are for military applications only. All of my scopes are SFP except for my last two purchases.
I'm nowhere near tacticool but I'm enjoying my FFP. It boils down to preference.
Good luck!
Senderofan
Well-Known Member
Just wondering if you've had much experience with true tactical shooters ( Professionals ) or those who train tactical shooters? Or had an opportunity to train with them? I think we all can agree that SFP and FFP scopes have their strengths and weaknesses.....but to suggest tactical shooters and their equipment could not or would not perform for long range hunting.....I have to disagree. And there are FFP scopes with low bottom end magnification.
It ends up being another tool for ones toolbox. It isn't for everyone....but it can be very useful once you use it and train your brain. The more options we have...the better we can get as shooters.
The inter web is full of information....some good and some bad.....let's not say that all tactical shooters are lousy and could never pull off a long range hunt. I've seen first hand what real professionals can pull off at long range.....and it was with tactical equipment and could easily have taken game at very long range.
cummins cowboy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2010
- Messages
- 361
I can agree with all that. I did say most and did allow for exceptions. you are citing those exceptions. tactical applications for most people involve full day light and range conditions. much of the country without access to public land simply doesn't have much opportunity to shoot in a variety of places, conditions, terrain, and light. the range is filled these days with inexperienced shoots who decided to get real gun after playing a bunch on video games. on one hand I thank these people for keeping a gun tradition alive in the millennial age group. On the other well I talked about the downsides of their attitudes.
Senderofan
Well-Known Member
Well...The folks I've encountered train day and night, rain and shine....even snow. The training is far from BR shooting. So....I guess we can agree to disagree on that.
The fact remains.....having sub tensions that maintain the same value at any magnification has real world value. Whether one incorporates this into their hunting.....is a personal choice. I really like having my laser range finder with me all the time....but if it should ever fail...I have a back up. SFP and FFP each have strengths and weaknesses. Both are useful tools.....Both can be used very successfully in hunting. FFP has been around for a fair amount of time and isn't just a fad.
Not trying to pee in anyones' Wheaties.........just trying to make sure "The rest of the story" gets shared as well. Best advice I can share is...... for folks to try each in the field......and decide for themselves. The inter web can provide tons of information.....but it can't provide real world experience with equipment.
Good Evening Gentlemen.......I enjoy having the freedom and opportunity to choose a FFP or SFP....hopefully this stays with us for many more generations!
CleanShot
Well-Known Member
Problem is trying out every type of equipment can be a costly endeavor but in time and money. I was trying to stand on the shoulders of giants with my choices so I can make the best use of my (limited) resources. I guess there is just no substitute for experience but not learning from others a mistake I can't afford to make.
CleanShot, I think we are learning from you at this point.
I don't read everything on this forum, but you are the first I have seen with a Sightron FFP scope. Your learning pain with this scope will hopefully benefit some else before they take your path with this scope. So Thanks.
This is a long range forum and seems always slanted that way. If you read a lot of scope posts here, I think you will find that (most) strictly long range shooters prefer a SFP scope. The shooters who favor a carry or mid-range rifles that are also used for long range use FFP scopes. Just guessing, since you hail from NJ you would be in the latter group.
You would probably enjoy about any other FFP scope besides this Sightron FFP scope. From what I see, the most popular ones are Vortex and Burris and maybe SWAF. Nightforce only has them in the newer high end scopes.
I don't think those support tips from Sightron will help at all. Seems more like they were teaching you how to focus the reticle to you eye than anything. That will give you a crisp reticle but won't stop it from going away, if it is too thin. I think you should trust your intuition here. I would go to a box store and look at a Vortex PST FFP scope, If you like what you see, return the Sightron.
EdWalton
Well-Known Member
The only FFP I've used is my Schmidt & Bender, it's outstanding at and beyond end of day, I have several Kahles & dad's Swarovski are distant seconds when coping with low light.
OK Ed, Now I'm confused (not unusual by the way...). This is your earlier post.
More details please.
westcliffe01
Well-Known Member
More bashing of one type of equipment vs the other... Lets face it, in the US most people will buy a SFP scope. In Europe, if one buys for a similar amount of money it is likely to be a FFP scope.
If you have sufficient time to take a contemplative approach to the shot, a SFP scope will be fine. Now I guess one should consider whether exposed or capped turrets are the ticket. If you have enough time, removing turrets caps is no problem, right ? That way it is much less likely a turret will be moved off zero while on the stalk.
If you can't predict how much time you will have to dope the scope, or if you know that it is likely that you will have very little time, then one has to make compromises (ugh, that ugly word)... Thus, one likely will want exposed turrets. And might check them right away when you get behind the scope, just takes a second (assuming you have enough light to see or a source of illumination). Similarly, even if you usually would adjust your turrets prior to taking a shot, if pushed for time, it is vastly preferable to have reference marks on the reticle, so that it is never necessary to use "Kentucky windage".
I primarily hunt coyotes and the entire experience from sighting to shot is usually over within 10-15 seconds. Usually they are out of view in just a few seconds more. I am usually sighted for 250 yards but the coyotes could show at 80-450 yards. Prior to getting my 4-16x50 FFP scope I missed quite a few shots with a small shooting window. Given that I am still the same shooter with the same rifle and I have not missed since I got my FFP scope, I think the FFP reticle is a very useful tool. And I really don't care about the tiny reticle at 4x since at 80 yards I am not going to have to hold over. And at 350+ yards I am using 8x or more magnification so seeing the reticle is not an issue.
Frankly, I think the people flogging this dead horse would not have a use for a FFP reticle if they had one. But that does not mean that these tools do not have a place. A running 450 yards coyote is not an easy target, even a trotting one. I personally have not had the opportunity to hunt big game like elk, but that just goes with the territory. In parts of Colorado elk are more common that white tail deer in Michigan...
If you have sufficient time to take a contemplative approach to the shot, a SFP scope will be fine. Now I guess one should consider whether exposed or capped turrets are the ticket. If you have enough time, removing turrets caps is no problem, right ? That way it is much less likely a turret will be moved off zero while on the stalk.
If you can't predict how much time you will have to dope the scope, or if you know that it is likely that you will have very little time, then one has to make compromises (ugh, that ugly word)... Thus, one likely will want exposed turrets. And might check them right away when you get behind the scope, just takes a second (assuming you have enough light to see or a source of illumination). Similarly, even if you usually would adjust your turrets prior to taking a shot, if pushed for time, it is vastly preferable to have reference marks on the reticle, so that it is never necessary to use "Kentucky windage".
I primarily hunt coyotes and the entire experience from sighting to shot is usually over within 10-15 seconds. Usually they are out of view in just a few seconds more. I am usually sighted for 250 yards but the coyotes could show at 80-450 yards. Prior to getting my 4-16x50 FFP scope I missed quite a few shots with a small shooting window. Given that I am still the same shooter with the same rifle and I have not missed since I got my FFP scope, I think the FFP reticle is a very useful tool. And I really don't care about the tiny reticle at 4x since at 80 yards I am not going to have to hold over. And at 350+ yards I am using 8x or more magnification so seeing the reticle is not an issue.
Frankly, I think the people flogging this dead horse would not have a use for a FFP reticle if they had one. But that does not mean that these tools do not have a place. A running 450 yards coyote is not an easy target, even a trotting one. I personally have not had the opportunity to hunt big game like elk, but that just goes with the territory. In parts of Colorado elk are more common that white tail deer in Michigan...
Senderofan
Well-Known Member
I think I misinterpreted whom you were referring to as the "Tactical shooters and Tactical Community." My sleep deprived brain went straight for the professional sniper...military or law enforcement. I wouldn't want to challenge the abilities of these guys, from what I've seen. I think my misinterpretation is what didn't sit well...thus my objection. Anyway, my apology. I've not interacted with folks involved with tactical shooting as a sport....which is what I now think you were referring to.
I still think if someone is on the fence about SFP versus FFP.....they should try and experience one in field conditions before they invest their hard earned money. I realize this isn't always possible. It wasn't for me. My personal, and very subjective, choice.....my field rifles all now have FFP....and my paper punchers have SFP. I like to have the accurate reticle sub tensions for windage or holdover....when their isn't time available to dial in dope.
I'm very thankful we have so many options to choose from these days. With the better equipment these days.....I really feel as though we can shoot more consistent.....than what we had 20-30 years ago.
EdWalton
Well-Known Member
OK Ed, Now I'm confused (not unusual by the way...). This is your earlier post.
More details please.
Sorry my fault (usually is). If it's very bright or the sun is low & the target is in the general direction it can be hard to see the reticle at low magnifications, during high humidity the target will be obscured at long distance with high magnifications. I've not found a situation it couldn't get the job done, just adjust the magnification. There may be challenges to the first magnification chosen, but it'll hunt in very low light, even hogs under a clear sky with a good moon.
Thank You
Ed
This Youtube clip shows pretty well what the OP's issue with the FFP Sightron scope is.
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks, Ed. I've never had the pleasure of looking through a Schmidt and Bender, but this is I think what I would expect. Glass so good that it works in the dark!
Cheers.
I use both FFP and SFP, and as stated they both have + and -.
That video shows a badly designed FFP reticle, they are not all created equal. I don't even think illumination would help at low power.
