FFP and SFP Scopes?

[krizia829]

Can someone give me the easiest explanation as to the main difference between First Focal Plane and Second Focal Plane scopes?

I know the crosshair will change in size when magnifying, but other than that, what else would you say makes a significant difference? Especially to explain the price difference.


Also, what would you personally prefer for hunting? Not long-range target shooting.

Thank you!

 

[Dub]

First focal plane will have the crosshairs appear to change size when you increase zoom.


Second focal plane has them remain constant throughout zoom range.


If your reticle is equipped with ranging stadia, such as a BDC or tree reticle....it will only have the reticle-distance correlation be aligned at a specific zoom, which is usually near the upper range.

FFP is always "calibrated" on the reticle/distance equivalents.

For plain ole hunting like I've done....woods, occasional clearcuts and the like.....I prefer a duplex or German #4. SFP is okay.


For what I'm starting to play with now for target use.....I'm enjoying FFP and the MIL-based master race of turret/reticle setting.


Clearly I am joking about the MIL master race.....but so far so good. Staying with it. Compass course locked in, steady as she goes, calm seas and peace at the helm.

I reserve the right to be wrong.

 

[Jester896]

Dub hit it pretty good...i like MOA over MIL too...it is easier for me to think in inches than meters...one of the pitfalls of having dinosaur dung between my toes
for me they seem to be small when I want it big and big when I want it small. I don't care for them myself

 

[bullgator]

Dub about covered it all. For practical hunting applications a SFP scope will work perfectly and likely save you some money. The FFP will have the markings stay true at all magnifications for proper hold over or windage. It can also be beneficial for range estimation if the size of the target is known.

 

[Dub]

I like MIL and yet I refuse to think in metrics.

Then again…..I am a knuckldragger, hardcore untrainable.

 

[Dub]

Judging from a gunshot deer and a couple missed deer……I clearly have a lacking of practical application of any focal plane.

My people clearly were a tribe of rock throwers and spear pokers.

 

[Jester896]

It can also be beneficial for range estimation if the size of the target is known.

It is easy for me with the SFP...I think there is where I struggle the most is ranging with one.

 

[Dub]

It is easy for me with the SFP...I think there is where I struggle the most is ranging with one.

Then theres the times when a deviant Range Master sets up things with those Pygmy-sized torso targets…..

 

[bullgator]

Then theres the times when a deviant Range Master sets up things with those Pygmy-sized torso targets…..

That’s why I said the size of the target is known

 

[Dub]

That’s why I said the size of the target is known

I meant to add....beware the Range Masters who are also fishermen.....


They'll twist it up on ya....."Oh yeah pard, it's this big"

 

[rmp]

Dub about covered it all. For practical hunting applications a SFP scope will work perfectly and likely save you some money. The FFP will have the markings stay true at all magnifications for proper hold over or windage. It can also be beneficial for range estimation if the size of the target is known.

I’ve used fixed power scopes for most of my long range shooting. Often dialing but also using the reticle for holdover. It works.
I’m new to FFP and really enjoying not having to fiddle with a turret or magnification ring. I haven’t hunted much with FFP but not seeing a downside so far, for ME.


Side note: My FFP scopes happen to be in MIL and it’s working great. I gave up some years back because I kept trying to convert to inches instead of using the reticle as my measuring stick. No conversion required and I’m a yards guy through and through.

 

[menhadenman]

I move between ffp and sfp, also MOA and mils. The biggest downside of the ffp, in my opinion, is the reticle is extremely small on low power. As in hard to see.

But like said above each hash mark is the same angle regardless of magnification. Probably more useful for long distance shooting.

 

[Dub]

 

[Jester896]

yep...I have the option of ranging with the FFP @ 4X...just can't see to do it.

you can range at different settings other than the calibrated setting with a SFP...you will just have to do more math

 

[sleepr71]

I just went through this trying to decide what scope to put on a 22-250. I went with a SFP scope, because most of my use will be actual hunting/shooting within 400-500 yds. I need a reticle that I can see quickly, and in dim light. The reticle also stays the same size on all magnifications with a SFP scope. FFP scopes…are geared more for target and extreme long range use, IMO. The reticle, and hashmarks are tiny at low magnification,and hard to see in dim light on a FFP scope. My middle age eyes don’t help

 

[Big7]

I'm struggling with that right now and for the last few weeks with around 3 large hanging in the balance. First and Second Focal Plane have advantages and disadvantages just like everything else.

Pretty sure I'm staying with MOA because I have the clicks memorized for the most part and mostly use the subtensions for windage. Pretty easy with flags and a chronograph. Next target scope I get will have subtension values marked and I'm getting rid of everything that ain't marked. It's hard to remember over multiple scopes.

The only (mostly) time I click windage is changing cartridges and or moving a tuner.

PS.. @krizia829 For a normal "hunting" scope, you probably will want to stick with a Second Focal Plane Scope and probably a simple Duplex.. You can measure to a crude but useful extent with a Duplex Reticle and they are common.

Best thing is they only have 2 reference points. The "thin" lines and the "thick" lines.

Most scopes that are not Duplex are a little to "busy" for the average hunting scenario out to around 400 yards. To 400 yards, a simple Duplex is plenty.

Read this little article and see if you have any questions. If you do, post them.

Rifle Scopes: First Focal Plane vs. Second Focal Plane (Explained in Plain English) - Scopes Field

What’s the difference between the first focal plane and second focal plane in riflescopes? In this guide, I break them both down.

scopesfield.com

 

[Liberty]

If you and I were both 20, my recommendation would be for a FFP for all applications due to consistent ranging thru the magnification levels. Being close to 50, I just can’t see the reticle clearly at lower powers and prefer a well defined dark reticle at lower magnification.

 

[Dub]

I'm struggling with that right now and for the last few weeks with around 3 large hanging in the balance. First and Second Focal Plane have advantages and disadvantages just like everything else.
.[/URL]

$3,000 hanging in the balance can get you into some stellar scopes.

I you don't plan on dialing then you can cut the costs associated with the turrets & reticles....and instead focus on the optical quality of the glass.

Interested to see which way you go.

 

[krizia829]

If you and I were both 20, my recommendation would be for a FFP for all applications due to consistent ranging thru the magnification levels. Being close to 50, I just can’t see the reticle clearly at lower powers and prefer a well defined dark reticle at lower magnification.

I'm only 32 and have been using glasses since I was 15 lol so I can't imagine once I lord willing hit 50! I also thought the same thing for FFP for all applications but I'm seeing the pros and cons to each. It's a tough choice.

I'm struggling with that right now and for the last few weeks with around 3 large hanging in the balance. First and Second Focal Plane have advantages and disadvantages just like everything else.

Pretty sure I'm staying with MOA because I have the clicks memorized for the most part and mostly use the subtensions for windage. Pretty easy with flags and a chronograph. Next target scope I get will have subtension values marked and I'm getting rid of everything that ain't marked. It's hard to remember over multiple scopes.

The only (mostly) time I click windage is changing cartridges and or moving a tuner.

PS.. @krizia829 For a normal "hunting" scope, you probably will want to stick with a Second Focal Plane Scope and probably a simple Duplex.. You can measure to a crude but useful extent with a Duplex Reticle and they are common.

Best thing is they only have 2 reference points. The "thin" lines and the "thick" lines.

Most scopes that are not Duplex are a little to "busy" for the average hunting scenario out to around 400 yards. To 400 yards, a simple Duplex is plenty.

Read this little article and see if you have any questions. If you do, post them.

Rifle Scopes: First Focal Plane vs. Second Focal Plane (Explained in Plain English) - Scopes Field

What’s the difference between the first focal plane and second focal plane in riflescopes? In this guide, I break them both down.

scopesfield.com

I use SFP for hunting, however, you can't go wrong with a regular duplex reticle! It makes me stop overthinking shot compensation at longer distances in hunting situations.

My 17hmr and my 44mag carbine both have duplex reticles. My 30-06 has a Nikon bdc reticle which I have the ballistics chart saved for reference. I try to keep it simple.

My Nikon on my 6.5 Grendel, however, is one complicated scope! For me at least. I will need to someday sit down and really look at how the reticle works. It's the advance BDC. Got it as a gift and I love the clarity!

 

[Darkhorse]

I use duplex reticles on all my hunting scopes.
A few years ago I really dug into FFP and other scopes. Can't remember nothing learned or why I prefer just the standard old scope. But I like my Zeiss and Leupolds.