For some skill levels the ability to alter reticle subtension at will is a feature, not a bug.
Just Sayin.
Laughing.
Whether talking reticles, rulers, interferometers, or oscilloscopes, a continuously variable reference frame is not a “feature” I’m interested in. Properly designed FFP reticles have plenty of incremental range without changing scale.
Do you know how I know you don't know schitt about oscilloscopes?
Being stymied by the change in subtension on a SFP optic is not really something one should brag about in a discussion with good shooters.
I can change subtension from 1 MOA to 2 MOA to 6 MOA at a whim and regularly use those settings in the field and range.
You might be unwilling the put a little effort into managing the magnifiction range and a more basic, simple FFP might satisfy your lower shooting expectations.
Who am I to judge?
I think I have to agree with John Burns here, but I have to agree with other points of view also.
SFP or FFP...7 clicks is seven clicks, no matter what the magnification setting is.
What you get with with FFP is a reticle scaled to the target no matter the magnification, and for some that may be an advantage. What you get with SFP is a reticle that is consistently visible, no matter what the magnification is.
IMO, learn to use either or both. It can't hurt to understand both and it ain't hard.
One way to negate the perceived disadvantage of FFP in terms of diminished reticle at lower magnification is an illuminated dot and I could live with that. On the other hand, I could live with a mil reticle in a SFP scope with the understanding that it must be set to max magnification to take advantage of the reticle and I could live with that too because if I needed to compensate for range, I'd likely be able to make full use of full magnification anyway.
There is no clear and indisputable superiority between the two designs, in my opinion. With either, you gain one thing and give up another. No need to be emotional about it.
We're not talking about erector travel at all, here. Just the reticle subtensions. An FFP reticle can be more visible than a SFP reticle with the right design and magnification setting. If a guy is experienced using well-designed FFP reticles (not Leup or most NF), he sees the utility. Those who are married to brands with poorly designed FFP reticles won't see or admit the truth. A properly designed FFP reticle is easily visible on minimum magnification (minus the hashmarks), and the posts disappear and the fine details are easily visible on max magnification, with a good compromise found in the intermediate magnification range.
There is a lot to be said for KISS. I've seen critters missed cleanly by nervous hunters holding elevation with SFP scopes, where the hunter forgot to crank to the proper magnification in the heat of the moment. The subtensions in FFP reticles are consistent and remove one more variable that one has to keep in mind when making a shot.
