First or second focal for hunting?

[lancetkenyon]

I think on some scopes, that shoot tiny targets like 1/4" dots, and have high erector ranges like 6--10x (like the S&B 3-20 H2CMR or 3.5-27, or March 3-24 or 5-50) where the reticle needs to be visible on 3x and 24x, that can be a little bit of an issue. But for hunting, even small game, they do not cover enough as to obscure the target so much as you cannot have a very refined hold. The 5x erector like 5-25 or 3-15 range is even better, as the reticle can be a bit finer. I have shot them out to 2000+ and had great luck. And out to 1300+ on coyotes allowed me enough to lnow I was holding on the front elbow. Deer and elk are even better. And steel or small rocks to 2000 are very visible for small holds.

But not for everyone. I totally get it. Thanks for the clarification and I can appreciate your preference for sure.

 

[Greyfox]

While my FFP scopes are considered a highly valued asset, and necessary for tactical competition, I find them more of a hindrance then help when I have used the FFP for hunting. I think that the change in reticle size with magnification changes is just the opposite of what condones a clean sight picture, and accurate shooting under hunting conditions, particularly in low light/shadows. I find uncluttered MOA reticle of constant size preferable for hunting. Typically using a power range of 5x20, with the scope generally set 10X(until higher power is required), it's second nature to scale the reticle calibration between 2MOA at 10x(mid power) ot 1MOA at 20x(full power). At less then 10X, I'm not using the reticle for holds. As is also the case with my competition scopes, I like a short lever on the magnification ring which is quite useful for the ease and speed of changing magnification for acquiring game at long distance, and also easily indexing by either sight or touch whether my SFP magnification is at full or half power. I would much rather put the extra $$$ charged for a FFP capability into an upgrade in a SFP scope for hunting purposes. IMO.

 

[Rich Coyle]

I would much rather put the extra $$$ charged for a FFP capability into an upgrade in a SFP scope for hunting purposes. IMO.

Same here. I very much dislike the "growing" reticle of FFP.

 

[Hondo64d]

I dont understand the "growing reticle" thing. In a FFP scope, if the reticle covers 1/4" at 4.5x, it will still cover 1/4" at 18x. Not true with a second focal plane. If a 2fp covers 1/4" at 18x, it will cover 1" at 4.5x.

John

 

[Browning300]

I dont understand the "growing reticle" thing. In a FFP scope, if the reticle covers 1/4" at 4.5x, it will still cover 1/4" at 18x. Not true with a second focal plane. If a 2fp covers 1/4" at 18x, it will cover 1" at 4.5x.
John

.

Well you sort of stated that in reverse because if it covers 1"@4.5x and 1/4"@18x then it actually shrinks.
Which is exactly how I want it. if I have it at 4.5x it's because the target is up close or moving and having a bold easily visible cross hair is needed. But when I crank the power up to 18x for a prairie dog at 400yd or a coyote at 800 then I want the reticle as small and precise as possible.

 

[FEENIX]

Here's a link that will get you started down the rabbit hole. The first post on there from @FEENIX will get you started well. https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/ffp-vs-sfp-for-hunting.169081/

Basically, you'll find that, as with everything else, it comes down to personal preference and how you intend to use it. To determine this, you'll need to understand your own skills, other equipment you have, your thought processes when determining range, tolerance for varying vs. fixed reticle size, etc. There are pros and cons for each. I own both, and have different uses for them, but I wouldn't say I like FFP over SFP or SFP over FFP- they have different functions for different situations.

As noted, it boils down to personal preference and the intended purpose. I own both and I am enjoying my transition from SFP to FFP shooting and hunting in Montana.

 

[huntaxhunta]

FFP is a great tool for Sniper/Tactical competitions where you are constantly changing range of engagement and shooting at movers. Having said that it would seem like hunting would be the same. For me it is not. I hunt in Montana. There are two different types of hunting here. Brushy and close and wide open. For brushy and close I use minimum magnification and my 100 yds zero will kill anything out to 250 yds. Wide open I'm at max. magnification where my reticle is calibrated.

The reason I bring this up is that you mention the combo of hunting/target shooting. If you'd said hunting/tactical matches, I would recommend FFP. But for the combo you stated, I'd recommend SFP, because like I said you can hunt on min or max. mag depending on terrain and still have a thin retilcle for target shooting. FFP reticles tend to be on the thicker side for min. magnification. I find them too thick for precision ELR work personally.

 

[Canhunter35]

While my FFP scopes are considered a highly valued asset, and necessary for tactical competition, I find them more of a hindrance then help when I have used the FFP for hunting. I think that the change in reticle size with magnification changes is just the opposite of what condones a clean sight picture, and accurate shooting under hunting conditions, particularly in low light/shadows. I find uncluttered MOA reticle of constant size preferable for hunting. Typically using a power range of 5x20, with the scope generally set 10X(until higher power is required), it's second nature to scale the reticle calibration between 2MOA at 10x(mid power) ot 1MOA at 20x(full power). At less then 10X, I'm not using the reticle for holds. As is also the case with my competition scopes, I like a short lever on the magnification ring which is quite useful for the ease and speed of changing magnification for acquiring game at long distance, and also easily indexing by either sight or touch whether my SFP magnification is at full or half power. I would much rather put the extra $$$ charged for a FFP capability into an upgrade in a SFP scope for hunting purposes. IMO.

I agree with greyfox, it's very easy to swing a 20x to 10x and double the Moa or mils on hashmarks

 

[Clearlight]

One thing to consider with FFP vs SFP , is that a lot of SFP scopes ,
particularly cheaper models change POA when zoomed up and down .
Not so much of an issue at short range on decent sized fur , but we
are shooting further all the time as tech improves .

Due to the internal design of FFP scopes , POA shift during zooming
is minimal or non existent . Very important at long range , and
especially critical for ELR shooting .