Reticle hard to see at low power on FFP scope

[westcliffe01]

That is a poor quality video shot with a low resolution, low contrast camera. Note how the camera reacts to the huge white target by over exposing the image. In addition, I don't believe the reticle was properly focussed for the camera anyway.

Suffice to say that even my eyesight (and that is saying a lot) is a hundred times better than that crappy video.

Here is a video shot with a better camera on a 4-16x50 FFP
[ame]https://youtu.be/dODyy6ep7tM?t=1m18s[/ame]

Skip ahead to 1 min 18sec to see the reticle shot.

This Youtube clip shows pretty well what the OP's issue with the FFP Sightron scope is.

Sightron SIII 6-24x50 FFP reticle MH subtensions - YouTube

 

[CleanShot]

That is a poor quality video shot with a low resolution, low contrast camera. Note how the camera reacts to the huge white target by over exposing the image. In addition, I don't believe the reticle was properly focussed for the camera anyway.

Suffice to say that even my eyesight (and that is saying a lot) is a hundred times better than that crappy video.

Here is a video shot with a better camera on a 4-16x50 FFP
https://youtu.be/dODyy6ep7tM?t=1m18s

Skip ahead to 1 min 18sec to see the reticle shot.

Only thing is that's apples to oranges. The Vortex is a properly designed FFP reticle. The Sightron reticle regrettable actually looks exactly like the video in person.

 

[CleanShot]

Also I was just looking through the scope again. I noticed at low magnification when I first put my eye to the scope I see the reticle well enough but after less than a second or two my eye focuses on the target and I cannot for the life of me refocus on the reticle. Can this be a parallax issue?

 

[bruce_ventura]

Yes. The focus knob should be adjusted so that both the reticle and target are in focus at the same time.

 

[cummins cowboy]

the reticle focus should be mostly independent of the scope focus. the sightron I have has a slight amount of parallax still in the scope when the image is focused. If I dial all the parallax out the image is actually slightly out of focus. The more I shoot the more I just prefer using nightforce. I also shoot tighter groups with NF dispite it being quite a bit less scope power than my load development scopes.

I see someone posted the video of the vortex FFP reticle. that reticle should still be usable with low light, but the problem is I don't see how your going to make out the markings on the reticle on low power. by not being able to do so IMO you have defeated the whole purpose of it being FFP. I have looked at that scope quite a bit and that was my observation.

 

[westcliffe01]

Who takes a shot requiring holdover at 4x magnification ??? When there is more magnification available ???

At the lowest magnification the reticle is basically a duplex with a fine centre. But at 6x, 8x, 9.5x, 10.2x 12.4x etc the graduations on the reticle are still good. All it takes is twisting the zoom ring. Even a caveman can do it....

 

[CleanShot]

Who takes a shot requiring holdover at 4x magnification ??? When there is more magnification available ???

At the lowest magnification the reticle is basically a duplex with a fine centre. But at 6x, 8x, 9.5x, 10.2x 12.4x etc the graduations on the reticle are still good. All it takes is twisting the zoom ring. Even a caveman can do it....

I'm not sure if this was directed at me but I want to be able to see crosshairs. I'm not expecting to see the mil hashes. The scope is 6-24x50. The Sightron is not duplex with a fine center. The entire stadia is the same thickness.

 

[CleanShot]

the reticle focus should be mostly independent of the scope focus. the sightron I have has a slight amount of parallax still in the scope when the image is focused. If I dial all the parallax out the image is actually slightly out of focus. The more I shoot the more I just prefer using nightforce. I also shoot tighter groups with NF dispite it being quite a bit less scope power than my load development scopes.

I see someone posted the video of the vortex FFP reticle. that reticle should still be usable with low light, but the problem is I don't see how your going to make out the markings on the reticle on low power. by not being able to do so IMO you have defeated the whole purpose of it being FFP. I have looked at that scope quite a bit and that was my observation.

I'm sure the NF is better but the price of each is quite a ways apart.

 

[CleanShot]

At this point I think I'm going to try to return this scope and get a Vortex Viper PST or splurge on a NF SVF or SWFA HD. The lack of a duplex and no illumination is just a showstopper. I think the comments about not being able to see the reticle in low light if true are going to make me regret keeping it.

Thoughts?

 

[westcliffe01]

There is a lesson in here somewhere... Pay $1200 for a scope with a 0.1moa crosshair or $800 for the Vortex with a 0.21moa crosshair and 5moa outer bars (which form the duplex at 4x or 6x depending on the scope you have).

The reticle info is not a secret. Amazingly enough, some on this forum have been super critical on the reticles on the FFP scopes being too thick. Apparently Sightron must have heard those criticisms and made a product for them...

 

[bigngreen]

Who takes a shot requiring holdover at 4x magnification ??? When there is more magnification available ???

At the lowest magnification the reticle is basically a duplex with a fine centre. But at 6x, 8x, 9.5x, 10.2x 12.4x etc the graduations on the reticle are still good. All it takes is twisting the zoom ring. Even a caveman can do it....

I shoot hold overs all the time on the bottom power, I always pack on the lowest power and kinda prefer more field of view but then I know what my reticle substentions are on what ever power I'm at so I don't have to turn up the power to use my reticle for hold overs. I'm thinking using SFP is so easy even a cave man can do it...

I've ran a number of Vortex and NF FFP and SFP for different reasons, I like the FFP when I'm putting together a rifle that will be used mid range, little timber or the operator is not as experienced so I use the FFP to eliminate the reticle being anything other than what it is. I hunt both timber and at long range with the same optic so I don't want the aim point to ever change size, when I look through the scope I want to see the same cross hair on 4x as 14x.
With SFP I have a good, solid aim point on low power and I have a precision aim point at high power not a thick bar distracting from that precise point I'm putting a bullet. If I look down to change the power I know what the reticle value will be, I've used this to just dial the reticle back and double the value for a more precise aim point.
Personally FFP was a disaster in the field hunting even though I do run both at times I won't hunt with FFP again! I just started playing with a NF SHV 3-10x42 with MOAR reticle and what an awesome little optic, very surprised by it!

 

[westcliffe01]

I keep hearing these claims, but it makes no sense to me. Perhaps if I was shooting elephants with a muzzle loader then the field of view / trajectory might be plausible, but it makes no sense in any kind of hunting scenario I have been in.

Right, so at 4x, illustrated below:

The width of the inner graduated part of the reticle is 60MOA (30 per side). Same for elevation. Even scaling down, the primary marks are at 10MOA. Significant hold over is not needed (assuming any reasonable cartridge one would use for long range shooting) prior to 400 yards. At 400 yards the graduated part of the reticle is subtending 240" or 20'. At longer distances it only increases.

My 243 Ackley only needs about 5MOA of elevation correction at 400 yards, assuming a 100 yard zero. The concept that I am going to split that tiny segment of the reticle by a factor of 6 (and it does not matter if your reticle is FFP or SFP it is going to be the same % of the field of view) and be accurate with it, when I can simply twist the zoom ring and see the graduation more clearly is not something that is going to appeal to me. A coyote is only 3-4ft in the body if moving at right angles to the shot, so it is going to be pretty tiny in the eyepiece at 4x. I would rather see my target more clearly in which case I can see the reticle more clearly too.

I shoot hold overs all the time on the bottom power, I always pack on the lowest power and kinda prefer more field of view but then I know what my reticle substentions are on what ever power I'm at so I don't have to turn up the power to use my reticle for hold overs. I'm thinking using SFP is so easy even a cave man can do it...!