I don't want to initiate discussion regarding the superiority of one concept over the other, so please...let's not go there. I see advantages and disadvantages to both, and I'm pretty sure we all can admit that.

What I am wondering about is the feasibility of incorporating both into a scope design where the main (and very simple) reticle is in the second focal plain with mil dots (or whatever system you might want) in the first focal plane. The idea appeals to me because I do not like the idea of the reticle becoming so thin or small at low magnification and larger and thicker at high power.

If there was a way to do it, it might appeal to lots of hunters. I just have NO earthly idea whether it's even possible. I know there are guys here who know enough about scopes to say one way or another.

Is it a crazy and unworkable idea, or not?

Ehhh...never mind. I thought I'd had a completely original idea, but google tells me otherwise. I'd never heard of the idea.

Maybe some of you guys have fiddled with one or more of the DFP scopes that have already been marketed. I'd be interested in your experiences with same.

I played with Schmidt Bender PM2 1-8X Dual CC at Shotshow last year. It is implemented pretty well, a MIL based reticle on FFP for hold over and ranging; A illuminated dot at SFP to keep the dot small when zooming out.

I believe Shepherd has done the dual focal-plane thing for a couple decades +. I owned 2. I kept 1 of them just long enough to close out a hunting season and promptly dumped it.

I had one, gave it away.

DF