i mean I know everyone's opinion is supposed to be equal and everyone who makes baseless claims just likes to end it with; "that's just what I do."
Right I know it varies. That's why I specified 4x16. I do not like real high power scopes. All my hunting is done 700yds and in. With most shots under 300yd. The videos I've seen the retical is so small on lower power seems useless. Are the retical designs made where the rectical is in relationship to magnification power? In other words, if power is at 8 on 16 power max it would roughly equal retical size at 12 in 24 power? Or does the rectical just keep getting bigger in 24?
This whole thing and every wild opinion is based on the disregarded fact that FFP is designed for people to use the reticle like a tape measure. That's what it is: a measuring device.
If you're at say 3 power, and it just looks like a cross hair, then your shot is so close that you are within max PBR in practical application. You don't need a big reticle. Not in hunting, not in the military and not in competition.
The SFP are matched where the magnification is best where the reticle is most accurate and that's why they do that.
Lastly, it still depends on the manufacture. If all FFP scopes where to use a similar reticle thickness commonly found in SFP scopes, it would be way to thick on the higher end. Thus the appeal is for people that don't use the reticle to the same degree.
That said, if you're maxed out on magnification on a FFP, then you're doing something wrong, or you don't have enough scope to do what you're trying to do.
Coke bottles at 750 on 12 power