Vortex PST FFF or second focal plane

[Doghunter23]

I am wondering if anyone has experience with either of these scopes.
I have a nightforce NXS on my 7mm, and my only complaint is I can't afford four more of them!
I want the vortex PST in 6-24X I read some comments that they didn't like the thickness of the reticle on max power in the first focal plane version and recommended the second.
I can't get a good feel for either looking at them in the store.
any thoughts?
thanks

 

[Barrelnut]

I can't get a good feel for either looking at them in the store.
any thoughts?
thanks

Dog, the difference between the SFP and FFP is easily apparent, even in the store. The FFP is thicker at max zoom. Some say too thick for long range target shooting, but not a hindrance for most game. The FFP also can be almost invisible at zooms ranges below 9 or so. The SFP is more usable for target and game in all ranges.

SFP vs FFP is debated much on this site. Most have strong opinions that are usually based on personal preference and the type of target/game shooting they do. IMO the SFP is best for hunters who do not use the reticle for ranging and rely mostly on their laser range finder. SFP is also best in low light low contrast conditions that require minimum zoom. FFP, on the other hand, is most used by folks who like to change zoom a lot and shoot using the reticle for holdover at various zooms (the main reasons they are loved by Precision Rifle Comp shooters).

 

[Timber338]

I have the Vortex Razor AMG 6-24 that has a first plane reticle it is mounted on my elk rifle and overall I love this setup. Just like anything there are trade offs, but I do like FFP scopes now that I've used this AMG hunting. 24x is great for shooting paper but I doubt I'll ever shoot at an animal above 20x. The extra zoom was nice to judge animals in the field this year. 6x is a touch to high on the low side for hunting too and the reticle gets a touch small. 5-20x FFP would be better for hunting.

Shot a bull at 800 this year and I had the magnification somewhere between 16 and 18x. Dialed for elevation held for wind. Next year will probably just use the reticle.

 

[Doghunter23]

Thanks for the reply's guys! I think that I will probably get the second focal plane. It's going on a 243 that I plan on re-barreling this spring. I think the second would fit me better as I will primarily use it for target shooting, as things usually turn out I like to think it will be a long range coyote rig but prolly use it for shooting paper and clay targets at long range 99% of the time.
If I ever get the chance to take it hunting it will be fast shots at low light. I could tell the FFP looked thick in the store, but without ever having looked through one at extended ranges I couldn't tell if it would bother me or not.

 

[teesquare]

Dog, the difference between the SFP and FFP is easily apparent, even in the store. The FFP is thicker at max zoom. Some say too thick for long range target shooting, but not a hindrance for most game. The FFP also can be almost invisible at zooms ranges below 9 or so. The SFP is more usable for target and game in all ranges.

SFP vs FFP is debated much on this site. Most have strong opinions that are usually based on personal preference and the type of target/game shooting they do. IMO the SFP is best for hunters who do not use the reticle for ranging and rely mostly on their laser range finder. SFP is also best in low light low contrast conditions that require minimum zoom. FFP, on the other hand, is most used by folks who like to change zoom a lot and shoot using the reticle for holdover at various zooms (the main reasons they are loved by Precision Rifle Comp shooters).

I can agree with most of what Barrelnut says...with ONE critical exception. And that is the point of impact on SFP scopes. You must verify at what magnification the reticle is "accurate". Most manufacturers ( Vortex in specific here...) set up their SFP reticles for MAXIMUM magnification. Not as much of a problem if you are shooting at a long distance target or critter...but, how many of us actually use their scope at full magnification as a practice? Steel plinker...sure. But it has caused me to shift my perspective to the FFP scopes in recent years. Why? Because I can dial up mag. to see in detail what I need, and shoot if needed - without disruption of my aim-point. I never use the full mag on a scope for anything other than a substitute for a spotter, or bins. A quick look - then dial back to where I need the reticle size and mag. to be.
Either will work - and it is a matter of preference. But - you really should allow time to use both before deciding. In good conscience, I would not advise anyone if I had not used both extensively.

 

[FEENIX]

[ame]https://youtu.be/4XgugJSqpoE?t=110[/ame]

It boils down to personal preference and intended application(s). My last 3 scope purchase includes 2 FFPs (SWFA 5-20x50 FFP HD and Burris Veracity 4-20x50 FFP Varmint reticle) and don't have any issues transitioning from SFP to FFP.

Reticle design also has something to do with those hard to see magnification challenges.

[ame]https://youtu.be/9Gl3d0pxkvI?t=40[/ame]

(NOTE: There are members here that are very happy with the above Sightron scope).

[ame]https://youtu.be/llGng9YkUJE?t=4[/ame]

 

[toddc]

I use both and don't have any issues and my brain is only 30% working due to age and having tooooo much fun when I was younger. If you go FFP, illumination can be nice if its late and you loose the reticle. All of my FFP have illum and none of my SFP have.

 

[Doghunter23]

I just saw on Vortex website they have a PST II coming out with more adjustment per revolution of the turret, I might have to wait for that to become available. It also has a different power range at 6X25 looks exciting.