First focal plane or Second focal plane scope for a dangerous game rifle. Distance to target would be 100 yards or less. Gents, what say you?
Reason I'm asking is Cameraland has a nice S&B scope with illuminated reticle, FFP on sale. I'm thinking it would do nicely on my Blaser R93 in .375 H&H.
Thanks, Jess

Probably wouldn't make any difference. What's the magnification range?

It depends on the magnification range, reticle design, and illumination, but either would probably work fine.

I doubt it makes much difference on a low magnification scope inside 100 yards. For a DG rifle I would look at a 1-4x up to 1-6x variable and for a fixed power no more than 3x. Other characteristics of the scope, especially reticle design, seem more important than focal plane.

I like Kahles FFP 1.5-6 I think it was. On low power it was just a dot but zoomed in it was a reticle. Don't remember the config but seems like it would be handy if the reticle was holdover friendly for targets of opportunity when carrying a DG rifle. I didn't use it on a DG rifle but a 9.3 and it was good on the odd longish range WT.

The scope I'm looking at is a Schmidt & Bender Stratos 1.5 - 8 X42 with a Posicom FD7 illuminated reticle.
Looking forward to more words of advice.
Thanks,
Jess

I think the main potential issue with FFP may be whether the particular reticle on that scope is bold enough at 1.5 but not covering so much area at 8x as to be a hindrance, but that is going to require actually having a look through that specific scope (which I haven't).

FWIW though, I have a 1.5-6x FFP scope, a Nickel, on a drilling, with a German Nr 4 reticle. At 1.5x there'd be nothing faster IMHO, while at 6x there's no problem reaching out to longer ranges, without the reticle being an issue at either end. A mate of mine has a couple of Swarovski 1-8 scopes with illuminated reticles and he seems pretty happy with them too.

Having said that, the only real "dangerous game" rifle I have, a 9.3x74R double, has a 4x, which suits it well.

FFP less likely to shift POI

jwp475,

What's the odds a quality scope is going to have a "shift POI"?

Most of my "quality" scopes are FFP fewer things to go wrong. All of my dangerous game scopes are FFP.

I had considered mentioning that, but for the OP's description of their application - shots at less than 100 yards on big game - I thought it unlikely to be a real factor.

I have this scope on a Blaser R93. It's a great piece of equipment! I use it for general hunting and especially on driven hunts where quick target acquisition and versatility are key.

I too have this scope. It is currently mounted on a Blaser R8 in caliber 300 Winchester Magnum. I have not actually tested the scope/rifle combination in the shooting range [yet] but I am confident that it is going to make a very good "general hunting" scope as Fuchs mentioned.

Now here are some points to consider:

a) I don't have experience with hunting dangerous game so I am not sure what the "real" requirements are. May be you need a bit heavier reticle (e.g. FD4) as the FD7 reticle is relatively thin at 1.5X.
b) This scope is relatively heavy (about 800 grams including Blaser saddle mount). This could be a good thing on a heavy recoiling rifle and a bad thing for a fast-handling rifle that you may need to swing quickly. (I couldn't find the exact weight from Schmidt and Bender website. It is not written in the scope's manual either.)

@Fuchs: Often I see scopes with minimum 1X power being used on driven hunt rifles. I am interested for example in the Swarovski Z6 1-6 EE CD-I. But I have two reservations: This reticle is way too large and covers a lot of field of view. Then, at 1X, you always see your barrel in the lower part of your field of view. What are your thoughts?
Thanks
-Omid

800 grams! Even with the mount included that is a very hefty scope. If that weight is right it sure wouldn't be my choice on a hunting rifle for that reason alone.

Seeing the barrel with a scope at 1x or 1.5x may seem like a distraction when you first try one of these scopes. In use - and I have several scopes with 1.5x at minimum - you don't notice it at all. When a game animal appears you look at it, focus on where you are going to hit it, and if the rifle fits you and the scope is properly positioned, as the butt comes to your shoulder the reticle simply appears, superimposed on the point you are looking at. Everything else more or less disappears.

The 1.5-8X Stratos scope + Blaser mount weighs 820 grams. A spare 1-inch mount I have weighs 200 grams so the scope's net weight should be about 600 - 620 grams. This is not too bad for a scope of this class. My Schmidt and Bender 3-12X42 Classic weighs 700 grams (with EAW rings around it).

I much prefer FFP scopes for most hunting applications. The lone exception being dangerous game hunts where the action can be up close, in dark brush cover and "quick". In close range DG hunting, the key features of the FFP scope, calibrated reticle sub-tensions at any power WRT the target, are superfluous, but the potentially thin, hard to see reticle at low magnification is a real liability. Just my 2 cents of opinion...

The Stratos weighs 594 gramms in the version w/o rail. Not a light-weight, but appropriate for it's ruggedness.

1x is often said to be the ideal for fast target acquisition. People claim that they can keep both eyes open at this magnification and thereby have the best overview over the situation. If you try this you will notice that at 1x the picture you get appears smaller than the one from the free eye. This is why the classical scopes for DG rifles and driven hunts have a manification range starting at 1.2x, which compensates this effect.

I hardly ever go below 2x, even in close up situations. Having said that I have to admit that I don't get along with aimpoints and other red dots w/o magnification either. Othe people do.
As for seeing the barrel at low mag, dan oz already pointed out that this immaterial.

Coming back to DG rifle scopes. The criteria should be a generous FOV (biggest problem with low budget scopes), no 'tunnel view' at low magnification, easy-to-turn magnification ring, no overboarding reticle design and of course a rugged design fit for the purpose.

FFP or SFP is indeed of subordinate concern for this application as minor shifts in POI are of no real importance at short distances. Though for me this is a matter of general attitude. I do not own nor do I buy scopes with SFP reticles as I feel that their design is somehow defeating the purpose, that is to be precise.

Whether the reticle becomes too fine at low mag on a FFP scope is something everyone will have to decide on his own. This also depends heavily on the design of the reticle. Have a look at March scopes and their Tactical FFP reticles. They give a near perfect sight picture throughout the entire magnification range. Furthermore, if the reticle is illuminated, a fine crosshair is even less of a problem.

Fuchs,

Are you invested in a company that builds FFP scopes?

Unfortunately not, it would be wise investment into the future.

Never shot DG, tho been to Africa three times..but I think interestingly, hunt WT deer here in Northern Wi. where we make drives. The deer are usually "moving" normall fast, and can be very close, when shots are taken. I`ve used a German No. one ,SFP, at 1.5x for this work. I want to see what I`m shooting at and want to see the reticul. This combo works for me.
Hoping nothing that can eat or stomp you gets that close.

Hi Fuchs,

I too have noticed that even with a 1X scope, the image is somehow not the same as naked eye. I thought it had to do with the diopter adjustment or eye position behind the scope (moving your eye behind the scope changes apparent magnification slightly). I have to look into this more closely..

Now here is another strange fact I recently noticed about 1-4X or 1-6X scopes: Their exit pupil is not as large as I'd hoped. Their exit pupil diameter is about 11- 12mm in various Schmidt and Bender, Zeiss or Swarovski models I checked. That is much less than 20 to 25mm I was expecting. It's funny I'd never payed attention to this when looking at such scopes at Shot Show or elsewhere (I don't own one). "Normal" hunting scopes such as Schmidt and Bender 3-12X42 have proper exit pupil diameters at their low power (42/3= 14mm) but the 1X scopes don't.

I am now looking at specs for 1.5-6X and 1.5-8X scopes.. Looks like some of these have their low-end exit pupil smaller than expected too

I'm thinking they are an American fad since range finders do a better job of ranging. They will disappear once the faddishness wears off.

Ringman,

FFP is by no means an American fad. European scopes have been FFP for generations. SFP was only used on export models in order to accomodated the American market, which didn’t know FFP. Only lately have they switched to SFP with zoom factors > 4 coming up. The classical German 4 simply became too fat at max. or too fine at min. magnification.
Further, the discussion is not on ranging but on shift of POI.

I am convinced that the future will see an increasing number of FFP models in combination with more intelligent reticels.

Omid,

In former, factor 4 zoom, scopes the exit pupil was indeed linear with the magnification setting. In current, factor 6 or factor 8, models, manufacturers are limiting the eyebox at low magnifications. I have no clue why they do this. But your observation is absolutely valid.

You are not telling me something I didn't already know about FFP and Europe. As far as SFP not holding zero that is foolishness. I think once the FFP shooters realize they can't see the reticle on low power and on higher setting the crosshairs are too large for precision shooting.

I am convinced that the future will see an increasing number of SFP models in combination with a greater variety of reticles.

http://marchscopes.com/storage/FMA-2%2024x.jpg
http://marchscopes.com/storage/FMA-2%205x.jpg

We shall see.

Those sure don't look like the FFP that I looked through. March makes both kinds. How many March scopes have I seen in my life? Zero.

An FFP scope with a more intelligent reticle? Hmm.. How about an FFP reticle pattern whose apparent size doesn't change when you change magnification?! You might think this is impossible but it is possible. I am the pround re-inventor of such a reticle. I came up with the idea in 2011 but after submitting my patent application, it turned out they were discovered by a Mr. James Benford in 1957. I have mentioned these to a couple of manufacturers (Zeiss, Schmidt and Bender) but no one has paid any attention so far.




Yes, this seems to be the case. As they tried to increase the zoom range, the designers must have limited the numerical aperture of the relay lenses which, in turn, has led to a smaller exit pupil at low magnifications.

I am fascinated. Who is the guy you are quoting?

Well, I have one. And yes, they are different to the old designs. This is why I know that the disadvantages of FFP can be overcome.

Hi Omid,

wow, I had no idea who I was chatting with. I haven't yet digged into your patent deeply enough to fully understand its fundementals, but I will do so tomorrow.

It depends on the scope as to seeing the reticle on low power settings. I'm 66 years old and I can see the reticle just fine on my S&B dangerous game scopes on low power.

I prefer FFP scopes to 2nd focal plane scope after I got used to them.

Fact is a FFP scope is much less likely to have a zero holding problem, that's not even debatable.

That's because you misunderstand current FFP reticles.

I am really ready to learn. Tell me where I see this new technology. I have been thinking about a new scope.

The Vortex Razor FFP reticles are some of the best I've seen. You might look there. Posts bold enough for use in low light on low mag, and cross hairs with markings fine enough so that they disappear on low mag, but become visible and capable of precision at high mag. Open center so as to not obscure the POA.

And FWIW, an FFP reticle is not for finding range. That's what LRF's are for. FFP reticles have more mechanical reliability, reticles that are the same subtensions at all magnifications for holdovers/offs, measuring misses and corrections, measuring target sizes, etc. I rarely have my FFP scopes on max magnification, so they are a significant advantage over SFP scopes.

Hi Omid,

I have now looked more closely to your patent. You have described exactly what Deon Optics has realized in their March Tactical FFP scopes.
It's so simple!!! I wish the European manufacturers would adopt it and go back to FFP.

Quality FFP scopes reticle don't fade out on low power in lowlight at least my S&B's don't. Correct FFP is mechanicaly supperior

The pupil of the human eye maximises at around 7mm, for some people far less.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20506961

How would an 11mm or 25mm E/P in a scope be of benefit to anyone?

If more light doesn't help, then why do I need more light to see at 66 than I did at 20? The brighter the scope the better I see

Any area of a scopes E/P over the dia. of your individual eyes pupil is superfluous.

The only way to increase or maximise the amount of useful light through the scope to your retina from that point,
is by ensuring the optical device of choice has the best possible 'light transmission efficiency'

I hear that all the time and don't buy it. I believe what my own eyes tell me. The more light my scopes bring in the better I can see.

An exit pupil larger than the pupil of the user will indeed not increase the brightness of the image if the pupil is 100% centered.
But a larger exit pupil will increase the comfort of use as the eye does not have to be spot on in line with the optical axis. I guess this the reason why jwp475 feels that it renders an advantage.

Hi Fuchs,

Yes, the concept is very simple indeed. But as you noted it is largely unknown to the manufacturers. They are all busy creating ever more complicated reticles and ever more zoon range.. The more hashes or dots or grids a reticle has, the better it sells. This topic is related to discussing FFP vs SFP for a dangerous game rifle. I feel that there is a lot more that you and I can discuss and explore about rifle scopes.. We might want to create a separate topic for a deeper and more general discussion.


+ + +

Regarding benefits of large exit pupil (even larger than 7mm and even for use during daylight), I agree with what Fuchs said. We are not talking about gathering light here. It is about providing a large "eye box" behind the eye piece. The eye box is the area that you can position your eye and see the full field of view. A large exit pupil (10mm or more) leads to a much larger eye box. This makes it very easy to position your eye behind the scope and, in a way, the scope becomes as "fast" as a red-dot sight. This is very good feature for fast, off-hand shots or for acquiring the target after the first shot.

Small Exit Pupil:



Large Exit Pupil:

Your eyes are not telling you anything ,its your brain that actually tells you what you see.

The eye provides nerve signals from the retina to the optic nerve, which sends it to the brains visual cortex,
which provides you with a visual interpretation.

I'm not a DG hunter but I sometimes hunt the black timber at dawn and dusk for elk, and have always favored SFP scopes to keep the reticle bold at lower power settings.
With these examples I see what you mean about new "intelligent" FFP reticles.
I find this very interesting. Thanks for posting this.

Consider a light, simple, fixed 2.5 or 3x scope for your rifle that is to be used within 100 yards.

Regards, Guy

Very interesting and enlightening comments, thank you.
Jess