I don’t care about winning an argument… I only shared an observation that I validated and tried to explain why the best I could. I did semi-pro photography, and I’m got a half decent eye so I can tell you that at least with a couple scope makers at a 1k yard bench rest matches where I compared the FFP & SFP scopes of like types last year … I could see more crisply with the SFP.
Sorry if that sounds cold but I could give a hoot if you don’t believe me… Go check for yourself. Of course I’m talking about scopes that are WELL over a grand… so for cheaper models I really have no Idea. Not everyone rocks a scope that costs a couple grand, not to mention multiple ones…
You darn near have to quit hunting to afford stepping into serious LR shooting.
Smartest thing a man can do in life is walk away from guys that “like to argue”.., who are all about “winning.”
I’d remarry a boss chic if I liked that kind of BS. … NAH
Cheers ! (Yes that was Sarcasm for those on their first cup of coffee)
SS:
Your initial post in this thread definitively stated that the phenomenon you're describing obscures targets at the yardages specified by the OP to the extent that it should be the overriding factor in reticle plane decisions. I don't think Jordan and others, including me, who haven't noticed obfuscating aberrations inherent to FFP reticles to the extent that you described are "arguing for the sake of arguing" by trying to gather more information.
Yup. I have no desire to argue for argument’s sake, but my training and experience is as a quantum physicist and optical engineer (I was sandbagging a bit before, but the part I said about not working for a scope manufacturer is true), and I can see no reason for universal optical superiority to the SFP design. That doesn’t mean that a reason does not exist, but I am simply trying to sort fact from anecdote.
All the NXS (except the 3.5-15x50 F1 model) are SFP and so is the competition. They have different grade glass and magnification. Apples and oranges.
And yup.
When you dig a little deeper, it is plain to see that any perceived differences could be due to a number of variables that are not controlled if comparing scopes of completely different model lines.
I have owned and spent a lot of time looking through both SFP and FFP scopes, and plenty of each, that cost over - some well over - $1000, at LR, and have not noticed any general trend in image quality that can be attributed to SFP versus FFP design. I’m not claiming that there is no difference, just that I can’t see a reason for one to exist, nor have I observed one in competitive, recreational, and hunting contexts.
