startrek1761d
Well-Known Member
I have read several places that all else being equal a ffp is brighter than a sfp. Specifically I am looking at nightforce ffp vs. Sfp. From what I understand it's because a ffp has less lenses.
Is this really true
- Thread starter startrek1761d
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
ShtrRdy
Well-Known Member
I hadn't heard of that before.
blacktail 8541
Well-Known Member
It is the quality of the lenses and the coatings that make the differences.
Same lenses just different reticle position.
Thats a first for me to hear. My experience and info is same as others.
JKPhoto
Active Member
Perhaps this will help?
www.pewpewtactical.com
First Focal Plane vs. Second Focal Plane Rifle Scopes
We take a look at the difference between FFP and SFP optics, lay out the pros and cons, and help you figure out which style is right for you.
www.pewpewtactical.com
Would you please provide references for those claims? Have you called Nightforce directly?
Zen Archery
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2012
- Messages
- 1,525
Yes it's true for half the internet and their opinion.
No it's false for the other half of the internet and their opinion.
(I've always called the manufacturer for information and details).
No it's false for the other half of the internet and their opinion.
(I've always called the manufacturer for information and details).
Don't believe that is true. I have both in the nightforce, and will tell you the Illuminated radical on the FFP is critical for my aging eyes. The SFP stays thick through all power ranges. If you have opportunity try at least the FFP with low light with brushback ground.
Thanks, was mulling this new thought over, and your post got me thinking or maybe understanding how or why the OP was told this. I could possibly see how the inexperienced or even experienced scope user thinks a FFP is brighter. In my experiences no question the reticle takes up less space or blocks vision in a FFP compared to a SFP at most power levels. Exactly why if I ever have an option I dont want todays versions of FFP in my (food to eat) hunting scope. Yet, the optic is still just as bright/clear for light transmission as long as the glass is the same.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2006
- Messages
- 290
Many optical systems in use today are based on designs that can use a reticle placed in either focal plane. Therefore, exact same number of lenses. An optical design will have more or less lenses based on the design, not the placement of reticle.
A better rule of thumb is that longer scopes will have superior optical performance. Generally, less glass.
Okanogan
Well-Known Member
I've got both in NF as well and agree with TBell. The glass in all my NF scopes is generally good enough to allow me to see during all legal daylight hunting hours, and often a little before and after if it isn't cloudy or particularly dark out like low clouds or fog. However, in low light conditions, especially on lower powers with the FFP scopes I can't make out the reticle without having the illumination switched on. Once it get lighter, I don't like the illumination at all but it does have times where it makes all the difference to my aged eyes.
HARPERC
Well-Known Member
I have both in Nightforce ATACR's, and still haven't tapped the potential of either.
If there is a lens difference I surely can't see it.
If there is a lens difference I surely can't see it.
Calvin45
Well-Known Member
Never heard of this but there's a scientific way to find out! Mount one of each kind of scope onto two different rifles. With the left eye, stare into the sun through one scope for 45 seconds. With the right eye, stare into the sun through the other scope for 45 seconds. Wait a few minutes for things to even out and then conduct an at-home eye examination to see which eye is the most blinded. The eye that is most damaged by the sun was looking through the brighter scope. It's science!
