Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics First Focal Plane vs Second Focal Plane Rifle Scopes

Ok all you window lickers.
Post um if you got um

Hint!

Or what? Are you the new moderator?

I find it hard to believe a grown man would resort to this. Covtard, really. Most people outgrow that stuff by middle school. If you want to have an adult conversation I'll happily oblige, but I'm not engaging in a pissing contest with a 12 year old.

How ironic......

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...s/19423040/re-clot-shotters#Post19423040

I have both and have killed big game with both. I really like the 3-12 LRHS for all distances that I’ve used it at range and on animals.
My SFP plane scopes are non-dialing but have BDC or Mil-dot reticles. I have a 2-7x with BDC that I can swap onto my lightweight rifle that I use for mountain backpack hunting when I want to be as light as possible. But I’ve been caught a couple times at the range wondering why I’m missing at 500m before I realize I’m on the wrong power. Hopefully I don’t make that mistake on a sheep or goat ha ha.

Have and use both, same with mils vs moa

but will say I prefer SFP for long range hunting, allows you to dial in to max power without obliterating your target with the fat ass reticle, that can be and is annoying as all hell, prefer it remains constant over all X's

I never use the reticle to range distance anyway, that's what the rangefinder is for and it's far more accurate than guessing close shyte

Good illumination can alleviate the shortcomings of FFP for certain conditions, but adds expense, weight, and a possible failure point. Another issue can be the illumination interfering with the image. Bobby Tomek has gone through piles of scopes trying to find ones that work well for his hunting in the dark. While on stand, I continually check the brightness of my reticle so it won’t obscure the target, if one appears.

Only FFPs I’ve played with have been fixed-power SWFAs, which don’t really count, but while my shooting with them has been at known distances, no ranging required, the combination of precise markings on the reticle and good repeatable clicks made that shooting easy and kinda fun. Shooting a .22 at 200 yards, I held, then dialed, dialed back, and held again, all perfectly repeatable.

My hunting is usually from a seat (on the ground in my current state of decline) and I can range all the potential shots with a laser while I wait, certainly more accurate than using a reticle on critters that vary widely in size, and that usually aren’t standing around posing. With very few exceptions, a flat-shooting rifle can make the shots I can expect held dead-on, or nearly so, which makes a good bright image and easily visible reticle most important. See deer, hold, bang, usually over in a few seconds….

FFP for target and long range hunting, SFP for set and forget, example, the old steel tube 3X Weaver does just fine on 1955 Marlin 35 Remington chunking 220gr Speers at 2175 fps.

At the distances most hunters shoot, 300 yards or less, for me FFP or SFP is not the question, it is the reticle design. Many lower cost FFP have terrible reticle designs that are not optimum at low power. So if you can't afford to higher quality reticle design, like what is in the S&B FFP scopes, you are probably better off with a SFP scope. And at 300 yards or less, the difference that matters between FFP and SFP is the reticle design.

At distance and for precision shooting, FFP all the way.

I would not consider a FFP for target work.
dave

Why? At what range(s)?

I use several FFP scopes for hinting and I have no problem at all.

I would like to know this answer also.

For some reason, this issue persists in these discussions. Estimating range is far from the top of the list of uses for a good graduated reticle. As you mentioned, the advent of effective LRFs over the last couple of decades has relegated estimating range with the reticle to backup duty, only required/useful in rare circumstances.

Yeah, reticle design definitely matters, regardless of price point.

What a complete joke!

You'll never see one at 600 or 1000 yard Benchrest matches, if it was the best tool for the job, everyone would be shooting one.....

For those that put their lives on the line and depend on their scopes to take care of threats at distance, FFP scopes have always been the preferred choice. I will take the wisdom and experience in scope choice from a sniper than a bench rest shooter any day of the week. For those of us that hunt, the field experience of a professional sniper is much more real world and relevant than a bench rest shooter.