Can someone elaborate on what a first and second focal plane is and the difference between the two (if any)?

Reticle in 1st focal plane enlarges as magnification is increased....reticle in a 2nd focal plane scope remains static through all power ranges

Thanks!

If you wear a flat-bill hat and run a carbon barrel, you need first focal plane.

If you like to hunt, and like being able to see the reticle on the first half of your scope's power range, you need second focal.

Dvdgeorge......is one preferred over the other?

Like for what?

Deer hunting.

? LOL

That could mean 10000 different scenarios. So, the answer is obviously, maybe.

Within 300 yrds.

Second focal plane for me!

I don't like covering so much of the target when increasing the magnification.

Thanks.

Soo... Stuff like hold over points will be accurate on FFP scopes at any power. Not so with SFP. This matters to some, not others. None matters at 300 really IMO. I strongly prefer FFP. (And never wear caps.)






FFP



SFP

That is funny right there. Add to it seal team 6 wanna be. Ffp has a place just not typically as a hunting scope

HUH? FFP reticles cover the SAME amount of target no matter the frigging power......

Even when looking at people thru your scope?

I will say i struggled a bit with a coyote at 588 the other day using my LRTS on 12X, not as clean as i'd hoped.

If you use hash marks on the reticle, they will only be accurate for value at one power level (typically max)on a SFP scope. IE .5 mil hash marks.

FFP scopes will retain the same values throughout the power range.

LRTS or LRTSi?

Shooting colony varmints. Like rock chucks and p dogs would be a great use of ffp. Big game hunting. Naw. Are you taking one shot or multiple at the same targets typically. One shot hopefully, second focal. Raining in multiple shots. Ffp

Retard. Back to the playground...

Jordan, LRTS, i saw the bulet hit him, using the little 6.5 Swede and 147 Horn, he spun a couple circles and made the 15 yards through the North fence, died in the rocks and sawbriars, i didn't crawl through for the autopsy.

Coyote hit at 588 is good stuff!

Thanks MtnBoomer, little hash marks a bit busy with him standing in brush of the same dang color, if those sombucks wouldn't move, we'd never see em.

lololol. That was funny.

You don't know what the hell you are talking about as usual. I have killed more big game with a ffp scope than you will likely even see. They work just fine. If you are going to dial, and/ or hold for wind, then a ffp scope is a great asset. If not, then a sfp scope will likely work just fine for all of your hunting needs.

Nice work! What was it about the scope that you struggled with?

+1

But I would modify it a bit. If you are going to use the reticle as a ruler for any reason, then FFP is a great asset.

The hash marks and the coyote standing in that old tall yellow range grass and general dead brown brush, he was hard to clean up in there Jordan, went back and looked at the same spot through my NF with NP-1 reticle, a lot cleaner to me, i know, old school, but damn i like it.

I dont shoot further than i can twist, so all the extra ups are of no use to me, if you care to see how i gauge wind, go down to the BPCR forum and look under the Bagwell Eulogy thread, Pacecars posted up a couple youtube vids for me, one is shooting a 152 year old original 45-110 Sharps buffalo rifle at 700 yards with barrel ladder sights in a guesstimated 12-15 mph full value crosswind, i held near 8 feet into that East wind shooting dew North.

The 514gr paper patch bullet over Lord Black landed a bit high and right of the 13 inch bullseye, the gong in 3'x3', still a dead buffalo, and that's what those old rifles were made for.

Thanks. Makes sense, as the center of the LRTS reticle is extra fine, even compared to the LRHS or LRTSi. To me the LRTS is more of a good light/clear background type of scope, while the LRHS and LRTSi are better suited to difficult lighting conditions and tough backgrounds that are common in hunting scenarios. I really like the LRTS for a steel/play rifle, though.

You bet, that 147 Horn tagged his ribs hard too, a lot of pink bubbly going under the barbed wire, i wouldn't hesitate a big buck or pig with that scope/rifle/load, i've underestimated that bullet more than once in the wind on home steel.

Over the last 3 years, since I began experimenting with an LRHS/LRHSi and getting accustomed to FFP, I've found the above from Jordan and atse (obviously not cummins) to be 100% spot on while culling a couple hundred pigs and about 50 whitetail does. Lot's to like about FFP in the field I've found.

Field? Not playground?

Threads like this make me envious that I don't have a place to do long range plinking, training and hunting.

Exactly. And I don't like it when they are turned up. With 2nd plane the reticle gets smaller as one turns up the magnification.

Relative to the target. To the eye, it stays the same size.

Ohhh chit, ooohhhh chit, is that a three-point or a spike? Ohhhhhhh.. Hurrrryyyy.. Ohhhh chit... Oooh chit. Gossssshh... Ooooohhh. Ohhh fuuuckyeah... Ooooohhhh I'm gonna kiiilllll it.........

OHHH CHIT - oh it's some gal jogging! Safety on...

sounds more like a tranny jogging if counting points!

???? I think you have that backwards. Like Vic is suggesting, the reticle only gets smaller relative to the target when magnification goes up in a SFP.

In FFP, the reticle size (or more appropriately, appearance of size) changes along with the magnification, and carries the same subtension throughout the power range.

Every scope gives up something, just because you can use a 40mm tube 8-32x56 ffp scope that is 3 pounds. Yeah it will work on a deer hunt. But it’s not the best scope for the job. Just like a 1-4x scope isn’t good for load development.

Love the comments about using the reticle as a ruler, you dipchits must shoot stationary deer. If I miss they typically run off. I am also shooting from a field rest and there is most likely going to have recoil blow me off target and me not be able to spot my hit or in this case miss. The guys saying this crap are range wanna bes.

Ffp or sfp. Both have an advantage and disadvantage. Those that cant sum it up like that and say ffp is the only scope to get don’t know shat from shinola. Go ahead attack the messenger with insults and not debate or facts. I am the luckiest guy in town if you knew me and the life I lead outside the forums. and could care less about your insults and don’t need anyone’s approval

Nobody ranges off a reticle anymore. Everyone uses laser rangefinder.

It's rutttttiiinnngggg! Don't turn your back on it!

What does that have to do with the discussion? Never mind the fact that atmospheric conditions can render a laser RF unusable, I was not talking about ranging when I mentioned using the reticle as a ruler. Holding wind, holding elevation, holding lead on a moving critter (whether for a first shot or a follow-up, where increased FOV is helpful and I don’t want the scope set on max magnification), in addition to spotting shots for a hunting partner where you may need to call a correction, are all situations where I’ve used the reticle as a ruler many times in the field, and have nothing to do with using the reticle to range the target.

Anybody with half a brain cell can clearly see the hypocrisy in your self-proclaimed victimhood status. You’re not fooling anyone.

I think it’s also equally clear to anybody with even a hint of savvy, who in this thread is basing their opinions off of field experience hunting BG, and who are the “range wanna bes”.

Jordan shoots at deer that are deaf and don’t care about high powered rifle shots being lobbed at them. Let’s call them maniquin deer

LOL, no flat bills or carbon barrels here, but I’m also not an extreme range varmint shooter or 1000 yard BR shooter, so I’ll take a well-designed FFP reticle over SFP every time for my hunting and shooting needs.

You can hold wind on second focal too. The hash marks are just a reference unless trying to convert to dialing. If I shoot and hit 2 hash marks right, I can simply hold two hash marks left the following shot. Doesn't matter if you have first or second focal. Same thing goes with a moving animal...

Wind is voodoo anyway, always amusing when people bring wind into a discussion like they have some fool proof system. . Usually it's people that don't shoot in wind....

Experience and practice gives the magnitude of those “reference hash marks” meaning. Ballistic solvers are a useful reference there, too. IME shooting a lot in the wind and at moving animals (from varmints to big game), FFP vs SFP does matter to me, and first-round hits without worrying about variable subtensions are more likely with a good FFP reticle. Again, IME.

There’s no foolproof system for wind, but the more a person practices shooting in the wind, the less “voodoo” it becomes.

I don`t own a FFP scope. All mine are SFP, but to me it`s about application. Where I do most of my deer hunting here in Northern Wi., a FFP scope in the middle of a cedar swamp at first lite would be useless at low power for max FOV. I couldn`t see the reticule.
I have other tools for other applications.

As usual. LOL. cc just has a special blend of aggressive ingnorance, condescension and then whiny victimhood about him.

I’ve taken Mule Deer, Elk, Moose, and multiple different varmints w/ a FFP scope. No complaints at all, and won’t be going back to SFP. Reticle design is huge to me tho.

But hey, if a guy likes SFP better for his uses, more power to him. Just don’t be a tool about it and act like anyone who uses a different method is a ‘range wannabe’...

FFP is useless on low power, but FFP soap boxers refuse to acknowledge it.

If you have to ask, you don't want it. Busy crosshairs and FFP aren't for casual shooters.

That too would depend on the scope.
There are wonderful FFP scopes that aren't equipped with large magnification ranges / turrets / busy reticles.

The vast majority of my kills since switching to FFP, have been on the bottom or lower end of the mag range. You’re looking thru the wrong scopes, with the wrong reticles. But then, confirmation bias is the way of the Innanet. So carry on... 😋

Absolutely. Guys that make blanket statements about FFP reticles being unusable on low magnification typically have very limited experience with various FFP reticle designs.

Yup!

Relative to the target is all that matters here! A scope laying on the table in front of me looks a certain size. Put it at 100 yards and it looks smaller, despite it being the same size.

And then again there's this new technology called an "illuminated reticle".

LOL, well there's that too!

Yep. There were a number of Euro ffp scopes that were considered the ne plus ultra of first/last light hunting scopes. I don't know the current contenders since I quit following them when the costs really grew out of my league.

Yup, got one of those, works great in my SFP glass. In fact used it this past fall as a poster in the middle of a dark day, in the middle of a darker cedar swamp. Vortex Viper 2.5x10x42 " illuminated". That was the first time sense owning the scope I used the light.
I don`t recall saying one, FFP-SFP, is better than the other. I said I didn`t own one, and it was, for me, about application. Some of you guys don`t read very well. The OP wanted to know the difference. That question was answered in the first coupla responses.

Personal preference and application. YMMV.

notice how the pro FFP guys say its the only scope to use and every other type is useless and sucks, and those using SFP don't know what they heck they are talking about. This is a hunting forum, the advice you get here will be slanted in that direction. Jordan says use the reticle as a ruler yada yada. thats because he is shooting multiple shots at the same targets on a gun range generally. That is why FFP is actually what you want if you are wanting a competition scope. There is a big difference in that use. for one its done in broad daylight typically and you need to take multiple shots at the same target. if I am competiting I would actually buy a FFP scope myself, huh imagine that. as mouthy as I am about this even I see a place and use for FFP, because there is.

I give the first light walk in story, you get up in the morning before light, you're walking to your hunting area, there is barely legal light, you see a giant bull flash through the quaking aspens 200 yards out. the objective is get a shot off as fast as possible, its point and shoot!!! this is how 90% of hunting in the mountains of the west happens. no one sees animals at 350 yards and thinks oh lets move back to 700 so I can use my fancy whizbang FFP reticle on it. even needing the features of a reticle, dialing for range, all that is only used WHEN YOU HAVE TO! a 3x9 scope with a duplex reticle gets the job done 90% of the time. what you want first is 1) can I see the reticle on low power in low light. remember 200 yards, elk flashing through the quaking aspens, I want the scope on low power, and I want the fastest shot gotten off possible. I need a bold reticle and I want low power! its only for 10% of hunting I need to dial or hold for wind. you don't give up the must haves (bold reticle, low power) for 10% of your hunting. The scope just needs to be able to hold for wind and dial only in limited situations.

if you need to shoot multiple shots at the same targets, rock chucks, P dogs, also hunting that is done in the middle of the day BTW, yeah maybe I see a good use of FFP. But even at that, I take a suppressed shot, which even that blows the shooter off target quite often and I say oh I was 4 inches low, I don't even give a crap to say I am 1.1 mils low, WTF, its like umm that looks like about 4 inches, BOOM!! that is what is so rediculous about all this measuring missed shots BS ruler crap. in practice its not like that. Its like umm that looks like 6 inches, I am adjusting my aim what I think is that much, BOOM. because your gun isn't sitting there aimed perfectly at the target with the reticle aim point still on the target after recoil when the [bleep] shot hits the rock 3 inches away!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! holy crap this is dumb. its adjust 3 inches, boom the shot breaks and hopefully hits, in those cases you SWAG it. this isn't complicated.

I'm a Pro FFP guy, but I also don't think an SFP scope sucks. Each have they're place. Shots at ranges under 250 yds give me SFP every time. Shots over 250 yds. FFP every time. Contemplating shooting at moving targets: FFP. Close Quarters Battle ranges (under 50 yds or so) for 2 legged or 4 legged critters: SFP.

This isn't hard, nor is it rocket science. It makes no sense to field a rifle, in the hands of a shooter that's capable of hitting and killing targets at 300 + yds, and saddling them with a scope better suited to shorter ranges (Like Most, but not all SFP scopes).

What most shooters and hunters don't really understand is that your cartridge, rifle, scope, mount, et al must function as a package together at the ranges they are intended for.

A little clarification is what I was adding.

Your statement was misleading with no reference to target but rather alluded the reticle appeared physically smaller as the power was increased.

a smart and wise man, who actually knows what he is talking about. maybe disagree a little, but that is ok, real world experience, I take that from someone all day long!!!

I've literally shot steel out to a mile. I ran out of dial and used the reticle. Second focal... How far do I need to shoot before my SFP doesn't work? Lol

I think FFP reticle designers could do a better job making the outside posts taper thicker and a little closer to the middle to help the guys who might hunt the thick stuff at shorter ranges on the lowest power once in a while.
Some do a better job than most, but wish they would take it further to help those of us that want a hunting scope that covers a broad range of conditions without compromising, and relying solely on illumination.

The ffp scopes I used made the reticle disappear at low setting. And the cross hair on higher power was too big.

A ffp scope with bold reticle on the sides and top and bottom with about a foot opening on the lowest setting and a center cross hair about a minute of angle would be fine. I don't know of one like that.

You become dumber with every key stroke.

IME, intermediate ranges are where the subtensions on FFP reticles are particularly beneficial. Far enough that the subtensions are useful, but close enough that the FOV associated with less-than-max magnification may be handy. Of course it can be an advantage at extreme distance, as well, if atmospheric conditions dictate a magnification setting other than maximum.

Whether another guy chooses to use FFP or SFP scopes is fine with me, and of course I wouldn't say that SFP sucks or that FFP is necessary for success, but for me and my uses, a well-designed FFP reticle has no downside.

You are not making quick shots in a hunting situation at distances greater than 300 yards with a sfp, unless it’s at the max power of the scope. That’s the problem. Sometimes there is no time to dial, and do math in your head when it’s show time. Steel, small targets, and rodents is about as perfect for a sfp scope as it gets(cum cowboy has this backwards). Ffp is awesome for open country hunting, as pressured animals don’t let you get as close, and don’t stick around long For one to fiddle with their scope.

I prefer FFP on higher magnifications, but don't care for them at all on LPVO's....seems the reticles become too small at 1-2x. Of course, this is when illumination becomes a big help, but that depends on the individual scope as some are not daytime bright.

Doesn’t matter what a guy likes here, but folks will try to talk you out of it.😂😂

Carry on

IMO, that’s the beauty of a FFP illuminated LPVO. At 1-2x it effectively becomes a RD sight, and at higher magnification the subtensions become visible and useful.