Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics 1st vs 2nd Focal plane?

Even Burns could almost not burn your marinara recipe.

He could burn it. TN residents would not know the difference

LOL

Let me set a few things straight for you.
1- Equivalent specs FFPs and SFPs have the same number of lenses.
2- Mirage is not caused by the number of lenses
3- Your written English is horrible.
4- DEON makes the best mirage-retarding high magnification riflescopes on the planet. Currently, their March-X 10-60X56 HM rules the roost. For example, I run it at 50X year-round, in South Texas, Atterburry, Ben Avery and Raton. The next step up is the March-X 8-80X56 HM WA that was used to win the Nationals at BA last month, running at 75-80X for the entire competition (4 days).

Go ahead with more insults and further displays of your ignorance.

More lenses help with seeing through mirage? Do you know how stupid that sounds?
Only a fuggin idiot would argue something so fuggin stupid.


Deon scopes are ok, but not in the winners circle often. For a reason. Connect the dots...

Another phenomenal display of ignorance on your part.

I offer this:

https://marchscopes.com/news/14179/

Where did I say they never won? 15-55 NF is the most common scope used, and in the winners circle. For a reason... and you know it.

The bolded statement is exactly my thought? Where did I say you said they never won?

Yes, the NF 15-55X52 Comp is very popular. It's been around since 2013 and it's a fine riflescope and much cheaper than the March-X 10-60X56 HM and the upcoming March-X 8-80X56 HM WA. Nightforce sells a lot of scopes and they sponsor a lot of shooters. But the NF 15-55X52 doesn't hold a candle to the March 10-60X56HM and especially not to the 8080X56 HM WA.

And how did we jump from FFP having less lenses than SFP, then mirage being a function of number of lenses to comparing the NF Comp to the March HM? Seems like you're quite slippery in your beliefs.

And BTW, I would not be surprised if the NF Comp, an SFP design, has essentially the same number of lenses as the March HM.

I'm hoping that you will have an epiphany and face reality behind scope designs.

Good example. I'm a big fan of the S&B A9 reticle, I like it better than the above.

What the fugg else does writing I’m ignorant, and posting a link to a march winning a match mean? You didn’t write those exact words, but you insinuated exactly that.

As a competitor, if you don’t know the basics of how a scope works, you are a complete dumb fugg. End of story.

Well, you keep displaying your ignorance.

I do agree with your last statement and I think it applies very well, to you.

Now, if you wanted to discuss mirage and its effects on optics, and stopped your insults, we could have a more productive discussion.

You are like a Fuggin Democrat. You and burns ever have a sword fight in your matching Ukrainian flag underwear? Both fuggin useless liars.

I see. We're back to gratuitous insults and deflection. You don't have much to work with.

I tried, but there's just no way to talk cordially with some people.

What exactly did you mean by this then. How am I Ignorant? It’s obviously a response to what I wrote below.

Nice. You left out the important part of your quote, which I bolded above. That was the ignorant part. Then you tried to deflect.

So you are saying that looking through more lenses cuts through the mirage better?

Nope. Number of lenses has nothing to do with this. Let me explain.
Mirage is an atmospheric phenomenon that is misnamed. Mirage is a French word that describes a phenomenon where you see something that isn't there. A good example of that is seeing water on the road far ahead of you and there isn't any.

The phenomenon that plagues high magnification scopes is more of an atmospheric shimmer. Everybody calls that mirage, and I'm fine with that as it's not a windmill worth tilting at.
Mirage is generated by the Sun warming up the ground (which can have rocks, water, vegetation, etc) and the heat waves and water vapor rising from the ground will mess up the image in a magnified optic. The mirage is useful to the precision shooter because it can be detected in the optic, and it is subject to the lightest of wind. If there is no wind, we get a boil, the mirage is going straight up. When the wind starts the mirage will be deflected by the wind and will appear as a river flowing in the optic. I have been recording mirage in spotting scopes for a few years now, to train people in recognizing the phenomenon and how to interpret and react to it. It's a work in progress.

As an F-class shooter, mirage is something that is simultaneously a curse and a gift. It's a gift because we can detect condition changes and it's a curse because it degrades the IQ (image quality) in your optics. It can even move the POA. This IQ degradation is what we are interested in.

There is no such thing as "cutting through the mirage." No optics does that; it's not a thing. Just like there is no bullet that can cut through wind.

What is a thing is that not all optics experience IQ degradation at the same rate. Just like not all bullets will be deflected by the same amount in the wind. So, what's the magic here? What enables some optics to degrade more slowly than others.

In a word, glass.

The way a riflescope works is that the objective lens will form the image of the objective at the first focal plane. This image will have been affected by the mirage because that’s an atmospheric phenomenon and it affects all optics, just not to the same degree. Let me introduce the concept of dispersion into the mix. When light is refracted through a lens the various wavelengths that make up visible light will not be focused at the same point. Also, the greater the refraction, the greater the dispersion. This dispersion manifests itself as something we call CA or chromatic aberration, and color fringing. Various types of glass bend various wavelength differently and some glass disperse it less than others. The scale used to measure the amount of dispersion is the Abbe number. The greater the Abbe number, the less dispersion there is with a type of glass.

So, what does dispersion have to do with mirage? Good question. The hypothesis is that if your lens has high color dispersion to begin with, the mirage effect will scramble it even more. We can see this in inexpensive high magnification scopes like the Weaver T-36. I used one for a few years in F-class at 1000-yards in South Texas and when the mirage was out, the target was completely messed up and pulsating in the T-36. Unshootable.

When I moved up to a Nightforce NXS 12-42X56, the IQ was much better in mirage, but when the mirage got very bad, I had to dial down from the 42X I wanted to use.

A riflescope after the FFP is really a magnifying glass that inspects the image in the FFP. If the FFP is bad, the magnification of that image will simply amplify the bad image, making it worse to your eye. A variable scope can amplify the FFP image to varying degrees. This is why the shooters with variable scopes will decrease the magnification of that FFP and thus reduce the mess they see. All variable riflescopes will have approximately the same number or lenses; it’s how they are shaped and located that makes the difference in magnification.

People are reporting that high quality optics “cut through the mirage” better than low quality optics. Yep, that’s because these high-quality optics control the CA better than the low-quality optics. The high-quality optics are not “cutting” through mirage, they simply are not as affected by mirage to the same extent as the low-quality optics and that’s because they control the dispersion better. But even with that, high-quality optics will run into an IQ wall as magnification increases.

I like to say that all riflescopes have great IQ when the conditions are good (low or no mirage.) That changes drastically when the mirage gets going. How can a riflescope be used at 50X, 75X or 80X in heavy mirage.

It’s that same word again: glass.

(More to come.)

You typed a whole lot of words, that really say nothing...

A 12-42 nxs has one more lens than the same BR version. The image/mirage is worse in the nxs. I have 20/20 vision, BTW. Those scopes are 20 year old tech. They suck in mirage. The target dances around, and scope needs to be turned down or it’s useless.

I was talking about an ATACR at 35 compared to a 15-55 comp at same x’s. In very heavy mirage the atacr is much easier to shoot consistently. Of course the lens placement is different in these scopes. That’s the difference in design of f1 vs. f2. The ATACR does have 1 less lense. Same glass. Connect the dots....

What is the number of lenses in the ATACR and in the Comp?

How are they grouped?

Which is the lens that is missing in the ATACR?

Can you explain the reason why that missing lens would have an effect in the mirage?

You should already know this stuff. Very easy to do research. Like I said, competing without knowing the basics is never not funny😂😂.

Here is a start.



F1 scopes dont have the reticle lens housing(black housing near ocular). AO scopes don’t have the side focus lens group(also black in front of erector assembly)

The rest is proprietary info.

FTR_SHOOTER,

Thanks for taking the time for your lengthy post.

qwk,


Thanks for the video.