First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane Scopes
I'm going to fly in the face of much common "INTERNET" wisdom here, but the reality is, if you are dialing your solution, you have no theoretical advantage in using a FFP scope. Both scopes act identically when dialing yardage, and can be shot at any power setting since you are using the center of the reticle.
However, many long range shooters will dial their vertical solution, but want to use hold-off for their windage adjustment. If using a FFP scope, this can be done at any power setting, but using a RFP, this can only be done at max power (There are some exceptions using the ½ power and doubling rule, but that's not the point here.). Another nice feature of a FFP scope is if you miss on your first shot, and if you see the shot through your scope, or have a spotter behind you calling the shot, you can immediately shoot again using hold-off regardless of the power setting you're on.
The rub is that if shooting at very long ranges, most shooters will naturally be at the max power setting. At this setting, shooting hold off is identical for either a FFP or RFP scope. Where the differentiation comes is with mirage, or with exceptionally high-powered scopes. There are times when dropping the power a little bit can be useful, and this is again where the FFP design really shines, because regardless of power, all the subtensions work, and hold-off can be employed for shots. If using a RFP design, you must either shoot at maximum power if using hold-off, or dial your solution.
Another feature commonly touted for FFP scopes, is their ability to range. While this is absolutely correct, a few comments need to be made here. First, if you are using a reticle to range something, especially if it's at long range, you're going to be at maximum power so you get the most reliable read as possible on the target. If you're at maximum power, either the FFP or RFP scope is going to work identically. The FFP can range at any magnification setting, but why would you sacrifice the ability for the better measurement by not being at max power.
Second, in today's world, serious long range shooters are going to be using a laser range finder, so this takes the entire discussion about ranging ability right out the window.
While this all may seem like I'm in favor of the RFP scope, you have to look at what you're truly using your optic for. For my long-range guns, I do run FFP scopes, and it's primarily to be able to shoot hold off. I don't want to have to think about whether or not I'm on max power, or to have to double-check the magnification setting when it's time to be pulling the trigger. I want to be able to concentrate on getting a good solution, dialing my elevation and then using hold-off for my windage with whatever my ballistic program spits out as my hold. Being able to shoot hold-off is the number one reason for employing a FFP optic.
I use a RFP scope for the majority of my walking/mountain style rifles. This is where they excel, especially considering I don't plan on shooting beyond about 500 yards. While a FFP scope would work here, they are generally heavier and cost more, which doesn't make sense on a rifle I don't plan on shooting ultra long ranges with, but will carry many miles each day.
So to summarize, decide what the main use of your rifle is going to be, and pick an optic that's appropriate. Are you going to be a long-range sniper type (FFP), or are you more of the CQB kinda guy (RFP)? Pick the scope that best fits your budget and the style of shooting you plan on employing, and go get it done
However, many long range shooters will dial their vertical solution, but want to use hold-off for their windage adjustment. If using a FFP scope, this can be done at any power setting, but using a RFP, this can only be done at max power (There are some exceptions using the ½ power and doubling rule, but that's not the point here.). Another nice feature of a FFP scope is if you miss on your first shot, and if you see the shot through your scope, or have a spotter behind you calling the shot, you can immediately shoot again using hold-off regardless of the power setting you're on.
The rub is that if shooting at very long ranges, most shooters will naturally be at the max power setting. At this setting, shooting hold off is identical for either a FFP or RFP scope. Where the differentiation comes is with mirage, or with exceptionally high-powered scopes. There are times when dropping the power a little bit can be useful, and this is again where the FFP design really shines, because regardless of power, all the subtensions work, and hold-off can be employed for shots. If using a RFP design, you must either shoot at maximum power if using hold-off, or dial your solution.
Another feature commonly touted for FFP scopes, is their ability to range. While this is absolutely correct, a few comments need to be made here. First, if you are using a reticle to range something, especially if it's at long range, you're going to be at maximum power so you get the most reliable read as possible on the target. If you're at maximum power, either the FFP or RFP scope is going to work identically. The FFP can range at any magnification setting, but why would you sacrifice the ability for the better measurement by not being at max power.
Second, in today's world, serious long range shooters are going to be using a laser range finder, so this takes the entire discussion about ranging ability right out the window.
While this all may seem like I'm in favor of the RFP scope, you have to look at what you're truly using your optic for. For my long-range guns, I do run FFP scopes, and it's primarily to be able to shoot hold off. I don't want to have to think about whether or not I'm on max power, or to have to double-check the magnification setting when it's time to be pulling the trigger. I want to be able to concentrate on getting a good solution, dialing my elevation and then using hold-off for my windage with whatever my ballistic program spits out as my hold. Being able to shoot hold-off is the number one reason for employing a FFP optic.
I use a RFP scope for the majority of my walking/mountain style rifles. This is where they excel, especially considering I don't plan on shooting beyond about 500 yards. While a FFP scope would work here, they are generally heavier and cost more, which doesn't make sense on a rifle I don't plan on shooting ultra long ranges with, but will carry many miles each day.
So to summarize, decide what the main use of your rifle is going to be, and pick an optic that's appropriate. Are you going to be a long-range sniper type (FFP), or are you more of the CQB kinda guy (RFP)? Pick the scope that best fits your budget and the style of shooting you plan on employing, and go get it done
- Previous page: First Focal Plane Vs. Second Focal Plane Scopes
