FFP Scope Education

[KY_Windage]

Many shooters do appreciate second focal plane designs because the sight picture is always consistent. However the most significant disadvantage of SFP scopes when compared to FFP is that any advanced features like bullet drop compensation and ranging can only be calibrated to be accurate at one magnification setting. With very few exceptions, BDC and ranging in SFP scopes are calibrated to be accurate at the highest magnification setting. It makes sense; the highest power magnification is likely where you’ll be taking a long-range shot anyway, so that is where those features are most useful. However, if you have ever lost the opportunity to take a good shot because that trophy 10-point ducked under some brush while you were fiddling with your optic, you can understand the potential upsides of being able to range estimate and account for bullet drop at any magnification.

Most of us hunt deer with pretty flat-shooting rigs, and don't shoot farther than 300 or 400 yards, so the amount of bullet-drop correction is not going to be huge. Let's say you lasered (or estimated) your buck to be 400 yards out, with no wind. You have to know what the drop is at 400 yards. Let's say your crib-card taped to your stock says it is 4 moa. True, with your FFP scope you could then just hold 4 hashmarks (assuming they are 1 moa apart, as most moa are) high, at any magnification, and nail your buck.

However, I don't like holding over like that. Many of my hunting scopes have wonderful little glowing dots at the crosshair junction, and I want to be able to use that, and at low light when most deer are shot, it may be critical that I be able to use the glow-dot. I can't do that if I'm using the 4th line down from the glow dot.

And, it takes me about 3 seconds to reach up and dial my E turret 4 moa c-clockwise. Then it does not matter what power I am on, I'm good to good.

But there isn't time! you say. Okay, I can also use the animal to scale my shot. I know I need 4 moa. I know 4 moa at 400 yards is 16" (going on 17", but either will work fine). I can easily put my glow-dot or crosshair junction on the spot 16" above the buck's heart by holding right over his back. I'd rather do that than try to hold the 4th line down on his heart, because it is too easy to use the wrong line when, as you said, you are rushed RUSHED.

I learned all this shooting p-dogs, btw. That is frequently done in strong but variable wind, and if you're trying to put the 7th line the right on the dog, you will no sooner get it there than you realize the wind just died and now you need to be on the 3rd line. You no sooner get the 3rd line on him and the wind gusts up again, and you need to be on the 5th line, and on and on.

Screw it. I can ignore those lines and just quickly dial the elevation I need and then use the dog as a reference for the wind correction, and get my shot off very quickly, just reading the wind and then INSTANTLY moving and shooting before the wind changes again. And with a few thousand rounds of practice doing that, you can get damned good at it, with AT LEAST as much success as the guy trying to put the 7th line on the dog . . . oops, no, now the 3rd line, no, dang it, now the 5th line, etc.

It's called Kentucky windage, and there is nothing faster. It isn't quite as accurate IN THEORY, but it makes up for that in the real world in other ways, principally speed and lack of confusion, by always using the junction.

As far as I am concerned, FFP is good for ONE THING only, and that is trying to shoot stationary targets at varying but including very long range. IOW, the precision rifle game. For BR targets (including p-dogs) or hunting, I will take SFP every time, and gleefully.

YMMV

 

[ronsatspokane]

Most of us hunt deer with pretty flat-shooting rigs, and don't shoot farther than 300 or 400 yards, so the amount of bullet-drop correction is not going to be huge. Let's say you lasered (or estimated) your buck to be 400 yards out, with no wind. You have to know what the drop is at 400 yards. Let's say your crib-card taped to your stock says it is 4 moa. True, with your FFP scope you could then just hold 4 hashmarks (assuming they are 1 moa apart, as most moa are) high, at any magnification, and nail your buck.

However, I don't like holding over like that. Many of my hunting scopes have wonderful little glowing dots at the crosshair junction, and I want to be able to use that, and at low light when most deer are shot, it may be critical that I be able to use the glow-dot. I can't do that if I'm using the 4th line down from the glow dot.

And, it takes me about 3 seconds to reach up and dial my E turret 4 moa c-clockwise. Then it does not matter what power I am on, I'm good to good.

But there isn't time! you say. Okay, I can also use the animal to scale my shot. I know I need 4 moa. I know 4 moa at 400 yards is 16" (going on 17", but either will work fine). I can easily put my glow-dot or crosshair junction on the spot 16" above the buck's heart by holding right over his back. I'd rather do that than try to hold the 4th line down on his heart, because it is too easy to use the wrong line when, as you said, you are rushed RUSHED.

I learned all this shooting p-dogs, btw. That is frequently done in strong but variable wind, and if you're trying to put the 7th line the right on the dog, you will no sooner get it there than you realize the wind just died and now you need to be on the 3rd line. You no sooner get the 3rd line on him and the wind gusts up again, and you need to be on the 5th line, and on and on.

Screw it. I can ignore those lines and just quickly dial the elevation I need and then use the dog as a reference for the wind correction, and get my shot off very quickly, just reading the wind and then INSTANTLY moving and shooting before the wind changes again. And with a few thousand rounds of practice doing that, you can get damned good at it, with AT LEAST as much success as the guy trying to put the 7th line on the dog . . . oops, no, now the 3rd line, no, dang it, now the 5th line, etc.

It's called Kentucky windage, and there is nothing faster. It isn't quite as accurate IN THEORY, but it makes up for that in the real world in other ways, principally speed and lack of confusion, by always using the junction.

As far as I am concerned, FFP is good for ONE THING only, and that is trying to shoot stationary targets at varying but including very long range. IOW, the precision rifle game. For BR targets (including p-dogs) or hunting, I will take SFP every time, and gleefully.

YMMV

What he said. I would add that those who use FFP rely on the hash marks. Those who use SFP don't or only use them as a rough indicator preferring to dial for the distance. In precision long range competition (like F Class) SFP is used and many who shoot that discipline use only very fine cross hair reticles with no hash marks. The problem with FFP in long range precision is that the reticle lines get so big at high power that they often obscure the target you are trying to hit. That is not the case for PRS competition where your target is 2 MOA or bigger but in F Class where you are trying to hit 1/2 MOA (5 inch X ring at 1000 yards), the lines are so big that they block the target.

 

[SSL]

The crosshairs, like the parts of the reticle, get fatter as you turn the power up. I don't consider that to be staying the same, and it is one of my principle objections to FFP for target shooting.

Poorly stated. I should have said: With either SFP or FFP scopes the primary aiming point (we'll assume a crosshair) will retain the same initial zero regardless of magnification. The ancillary markings will change values with magnification changes with SFP but remain the same with FFP.

I'm not a big fan of SFP reticles getting fatter either. At low power many reticles can hardly be seen, or seen as merely a very busy mass of markings. At high power many cover far too much of the intended target due to the magnification of the reticle.

 

[KY_Windage]

Poorly stated. I should have said: With either SFP or FFP scopes the primary aiming point (we'll assume a crosshair) will retain the same initial zero regardless of magnification. The ancillary markings will change values with magnification changes with SFP but remain the same with FFP.

I'm not a big fan of SFP reticles getting fatter either. At low power many reticles can hardly be seen, or seen as merely a very busy mass of markings. At high power many cover far too much of the intended target due to the magnification of the reticle.

Bingo, though I know you meant FFP reticles, not "SFP."

 

[SSL]

Bingo, though I know you meant FFP reticles, not "SFP."

LOL...did it again! Right FFP.

 

[sscoyote]

I love the math that surrounds reticle subtention especially SFP. It's really amazing what can be accomplished with it. Not long ago a buddy shot a 500-yd. prairie dog with his 3-9X plex-reticled scope that we measured the plex post tip subtension on a cactus at 100 yds. at 9X, then ran the ballistics of his load, and calcd the magnification he needed that would allow him to use the plex post tip to engage a 500-yd. target, since RETICLE SUBTENTION IS INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO MAGNIFICATION in SFP reticles. Calc. came out to about 3.5X. Buddy adjusted his scope to that power and on the 2nd shot nailed a pd we'd ranged at 500. It was memorably rewarding, as subtention has been many times for me in the past.

The two most important aspects of reticle subtention are:
1) Reticle subtention is inversely proportional to magnification in SFP optics, and
2) The mil-ranging formula defines not only rangefinding but also downrange zeroing, and is not specific to the milliradian and can be used with any 2 points at one distance relative to any 2 points at another distance.

These concepts do require some study and experience to understand really. Took me many years to learn what I have. Seems though that once you're a student of subtention you're always gonna be a subtention student.

 

[NZ_Fclass]

While uncommon, I prefer shooting with FFP for FTR competition. As I mainly shoot on electronic targets, which indicate an accurate distace to centre, shooting can be quite fast. Having a FFP reticle allows for fast wind correction, without dialling. Hey, Its a personal thing. Last year I shot with SFP, next year...

 

[NateHaler]

I am trying to educate myself of the mechanics of FFP scope operation. I understand the reticle magnifies with the target. What I don't understand is the difference in shooting from a SFP scope when the magnification is adjusted. On a SFP, once I zero the gun at a specific magnification, I must shoot at that magnification to maintain that zero. My question: Since the FFP scope magnifies the reticle and the target simultaneously, is the zero valid for all magnification settings?

I do realize that I have to adjust for bullet drop at longer distances and other variables, but I'm unclear on the operational differences between FFP and SFP at the several magnification settings.

Thanks.

Forget what you've heard. The FFP enables you to estimate range using the reticle for the same dimensions at all magnifications. That's it.

The vast majority of shooters will be much better off with a Second Focal Plane scope.

 

[NateHaler]

While uncommon, I prefer shooting with FFP for FTR competition. As I mainly shoot on electronic targets, which indicate an accurate distace to centre, shooting can be quite fast. Having a FFP reticle allows for fast wind correction, without dialling. Hey, Its a personal thing. Last year I shot with SFP, next year...

Unless you are changing magnification during your firing string, there is no advantage for FFP in your scenario.

 

[5698k]

I’m a relative rookie to the game, but I’ve quickly learned a preference. Currently, I’m primarily shooting between 600-1100 yards, at 100 yard increments. SFP makes it simple. I mostly shoot at the highest magnification because my crosshairs don’t obscure the target, and I simply dial the turrets to the correct setting for the distance shooting. I’m shooting an ATACR with a Moar T reticle, and quite frankly, I wish I could get a simple crosshair, because the hash marks are distracting.

 

[OLeveraction]

Mr Cleveland,
In a FFP scope the reticle gets bigger or smaller depending on the magnification.
The cross hairs do not move and stay centered. POA does not changes.

 

[NZ_Fclass]

Unless you are changing magnification during your firing string, there is no advantage for FFP in your scenario.

But you are assuming that one shoots at the magnification where the scope is calibrated.

My Sightron SFP scope is correct at 24x, I would often shoot around 30x, not usually at 32x, as it gets a bit dark screwed right in. Advantage, maybe not, but no disadvantage either.

 

[rijndael]

It's definitely harder to make wind calls for your shooting partner. If I call .5 Mil Left ... it needs to be .5 Mils. I've made that mistake before. He was on FFP and I'm on SFP, dialed to half power. My 1 Mil was not his 1 Mil.

 

[KY_Windage]

It's definitely harder to make wind calls for your shooting partner. If I call .5 Mil Left ... it needs to be .5 Mils. I've made that mistake before. He was on FFP and I'm on SFP, dialed to half power. My 1 Mil was not his 1 Mil.

Very true, but there is no way I'm giving up my super-fine reticles (at even max power), like the NF MOAR-T, NP-R1, NP-R2 or FCR-1, to get that flexability. When we shoot p-dogs, we make a few hundred wind-calls every day without ever looking at hashmarks -- we know how big the target is and it is simply, "You were about 6" high and a foot left." However, I do occasionally use the reticle to range (by first turning to the power that is synched to the reticle) so I do want the hashmarks to be there. But like 5698k, sometimes I wish they were not there at all, or like the NP-R2, far apart.

It is all just a matter of personal preference, determined by how and what you shoot most often. Neither is inherently better than the other, except for you.

 

[wkdickinson]

IMHO, if you are target shooting at known distances, then a SFP scope should be your choice. Because the thickness of the various reticle components stay the same, while the relative size of the target increases as you increase the power of the scope. If you have a SFP scope with a reticle that is .22moa wide at 1,000yds that is only 2.3". Consequently, you can place the crosshairs/sub-tensions much more precisely on the target. However, if your ranges aren't known and you want to use your scope for ranging, the FFP is the way to go, as previously discussed, as you increase the magnification of the scope the thickness of the reticle appears to increase equally, covering a significantly larger portion of the target.

It's been mentioned here that most SFP scope have their sub-tensions calibrated for max power. That is not necessarily true. I have a Sightron SIII 8-36x56 (MOAR) that is calibrated for 24X, a Vortex 15-60x52 GE (ECR-1) that's calibrated at 40X and a Nightforce 5.5-22x50 (MOAR-T) that's calibrated for 22X. All SFP scopes.

 

[rijndael]

It's been mentioned here that most SFP scope have their sub-tensions calibrated for max power. That is not necessarily true.

It was a more accurate rule-of-thumb a few years ago when a 22X Nightforce was a on the higher end of common magnifications. That's back when common scopes were 3.2-17, 4-14, 3-15, 5.5-22, etc. As the magnifications got much higher, things have changed a bit.

 

[Tokay444]

My first, "real" scope was, and still is a S&B PMII MIL/MIL FFP with an H59 reticle.
I don't know that I'll ever shoot an SFP scope if I can at all help it.

 

[KY_Windage]

But you are assuming that one shoots at the magnification where the scope is calibrated.

Actually, he is not, because you said FTR. There (and in F-Class) your target is marked to show you where your last hit was. Even with my SFP scope set to some non-synched magnification (say, 17.7X when my turrets and reticle are synched at 25X), I have two separate ways to correct. One of them couldn't care less what I do with my magnification, and the other does require that I not mess with my magnification.

First, and I do this frequently, if I get at strike at 7 o'clock halfway between the 8-ring and the 9-ring, and I want to exactly correct my hold for that, I can simply hold at 1 o'clock halfway between those two rings. IOW, I can just "mirror image" it. And in the process I can change magnification, change my parallax, change my hat -- it does not matter -- I still just need to hold at 1-o'clock between those two rings.

Second, let's say the breeze came up and pushed me to the left of the X. Let's assume I think that breeze will not change for the next shot, and that all of my error was caused by the increased wind, and I want to hold for it. I can use my hashmarks to measure from the shot marker to the center of the X. Let's say that is 3-1/2 hashmarks. It does not matter whether those hashmarks subtend 1 MOA, 1 MR, 1.733 MOA or one medium-sized bullfrog -- whatever they are I can hold 3.5 of them to the right and I will be moving my POI to the center of the X. The only way I would have a problem would be if I changed magnification in the middle of that, which I am probably never going to want to do anyway.

Now, I will sometimes dial in an elevation correction for a hot barrel or something, and on rare occasions even a windage correction, but I don't use my reticle to define it -- I let the target tell me how many MOA I am from the center of the X, which is easy to do because the X-ring diameter is .5 MOA, the 10-ring is 1 MOA, etc.

So, shooting F-Class I never have a need for my reticle to be synched to my turrets, as is the case with an FFP scope. What I DO need in F-Class shooting is a very fine reticle at high magnification, so that I can be quadra-secting the X-ring when I pull the trigger, instead of covering it up with my reticle and guessing where the exact center is.

There is not a FFP scope made that will give me that option. They all have reticles that get fat at high magnification. If all you care about is having the scorekeeper yell "Impact!" after you shoot, fat FFP reticles work great. But if you are trying to keep all your hits in a .5 MOA circle, the super-fine reticles that are available to you in SFP scopes work much, much better for most people.

Not that you can't make anything work, but that is the way most people's preferences run, and why some of us wouldn't use an FFP scope if you gave us a Tangent Theta. We want the extreme aiming precision that SFP affords on every game we shoot, from BR to F-Class to p-dogs to deer.

And shooting p-dogs I am constantly dialing my magnification up and down, up and down -- down to find them, up to shoot them. And I HATE having that "ball of twine" mess cluttering up the middle of my search picture that you get with an FFP scope at low power. I'll take SFP any day.

YMMV

 

[KY_Windage]

It's been mentioned here that most SFP scope have their sub-tensions calibrated for max power. That is not necessarily true. I have a Sightron SIII 8-36x56 (MOAR) that is calibrated for 24X, a Vortex 15-60x52 GE (ECR-1) that's calibrated at 40X and a Nightforce 5.5-22x50 (MOAR-T) that's calibrated for 22X. All SFP scopes.

It is more accurate to say all low to medium range SFP scopes synch at max power. With higher power ones, they usually synch at something lower, like the 8-32 NXS that synchs at 22.