I just bought a 2nd Plane......I REALLY wanted the same size Reticleel ALL the time...
What are your thoughts
Thanks
What are your thoughts
Thanks
- The AGN App is ready! Search "Airgun Nation" in your App store. To compliment this new tech we've assigned the "Threads" Feed & "Dark" Mode. To revert back click HERE.
AirGun Scopes.......... Opinions about First Plane or 2nd Plane....Big Diff!
- Thread starter CheckUrSix
- Start date
my thoughts are theyve hyped up the advantages of those ffp scopes to empty your wallet .. but if thats what you want get one ..
Upvote 0
If you want the same size reticle all the time then just get a second focal plain scope. It depends on what you are using them for how improtant one is over the other. Nothing wrong with either type of scope and it's more of a personal preference than anything else.
Upvote 0
Absolutely agree. Just a personal preference. I like having my holdover distances consistent so I like ffp for many circumstances. But I also own many sfp scopes.
Upvote 0
I own many of both. And prefer FFP because its ease of using holdovers quickly without the goal posts changing. IMO, for hunting FFP is the way to go for sure, since ffp became popular its made possible quick hunting shots at all distances/magnification without getting out your calculator/chart.
To me the changing size of the cross hairs is a non issue in quality FFP scopes. As high power FFP scopes that I use are never used at lowest power that might have thin hard to see cross hairs. Although all my FFP scopes even at lowest power have easy to see reticles with no illumination needed, even my $200 VTT.
To me, at my age/eyes, the more magnification the better. For me, never use lowest power on my scopes, not sure why anyone would want to..? Even at close range of 15 yards a nutters head at 16 power fills the scope pic like a dime in a half dollar frame, perfect, you can see the fleas crawling thru the nutters fur. Sure, you don't need high power at close range, but it sure makes it easier to pinpoint your poi compared to very low power that also might give a less than stellar cross hair image....
Maybe I'm missing something,? scopes are not my expertise....
jmo
To me the changing size of the cross hairs is a non issue in quality FFP scopes. As high power FFP scopes that I use are never used at lowest power that might have thin hard to see cross hairs. Although all my FFP scopes even at lowest power have easy to see reticles with no illumination needed, even my $200 VTT.
To me, at my age/eyes, the more magnification the better. For me, never use lowest power on my scopes, not sure why anyone would want to..? Even at close range of 15 yards a nutters head at 16 power fills the scope pic like a dime in a half dollar frame, perfect, you can see the fleas crawling thru the nutters fur. Sure, you don't need high power at close range, but it sure makes it easier to pinpoint your poi compared to very low power that also might give a less than stellar cross hair image....
Maybe I'm missing something,? scopes are not my expertise....
jmo
Upvote 0
FFP for long distance when zoomed in, long range precision hunting or target work FFP rules
SFP for close up quick shot, for hunting at various distances then SFP rules if the turrets track true(if you dial) or hold over by distance.
SFP for close up quick shot, for hunting at various distances then SFP rules if the turrets track true(if you dial) or hold over by distance.
Upvote 0
It's all preference! I tried FFP but I didn't like it. Went back to SFP scopes. Never looked back!
Upvote 0
I tried the FFP Mrad , loved it , never looked back . Just seems easier for me the way the recticle scale holds at all magnifications .
Upvote 0
I started with a few SFP, but once I tried FFP I knew that was my preference. It really nags at me when the reticle scale is only accurate at one zoom level.
Upvote 0
Same here, started with SFP after trying my first FFP, not looking back. For pesting and hunting FFP all the way for me. Both styles will get it done with a good shooter sending...
Upvote 0
I’m kind of back where I started. A simple reticle. SFP and about 6.5 to 20 mag. If your scope has a target turret that tracks well here is what I do. I have a good set of binoculars with a built in range finder. Range your target and make up a cheat sheet with the bullet drop. Range it dial it and hold center This is certainly not the only way to do it
Upvote 0
I like to shoot using hold overs and dialing. I will dial elevation for a distant target pass my 40 yard zero. Ex: dial 5 MOA gets my hits at 66 yards. Then I dial back down 5 MOA. Then I hold over 5 MOA and get the same hits. Confirmed by me, shot after shot. So for some shots while pesting I simply holdover. I use my 6-24x50 FFP throughout it's magnification range. I can use holdovers or dial as I see fit at any magnification. I understand that a good SFP scope can be dialed for elevation and be as accurate. Using the same holdovers at various magnification is where FFP shines for me.
Upvote 0
FFP-scopes for me. Absolutely no doubt about it, if it is quality glass!
IOR, or now Valdada , and the model Crusader and Recon is the one I prefer to use. Ok, they cost a bit, but you`ll have them for lifetime.
EDIT: Moved the IOR Pitbull 1-4 That is not relevant here, and is only used on one of my pistols.
And I want to mention the Athlon Cronus. Satisfied with that also, but it is not on the "IOR-level". gt.
IOR, or now Valdada , and the model Crusader and Recon is the one I prefer to use. Ok, they cost a bit, but you`ll have them for lifetime.
EDIT: Moved the IOR Pitbull 1-4 That is not relevant here, and is only used on one of my pistols.
And I want to mention the Athlon Cronus. Satisfied with that also, but it is not on the "IOR-level". gt.
Upvote 0
Whatever works for you, I own both and for the next scope, I got no preferences...Depends on what the scope will be used for.
B
B
Upvote 0
But which is better MOA or MIL.
Which is better 17 cal ,22, 20, 25, 30, etc.
..........
If you will be on mid to higher magnifications most of the time FFP is generally easier for holds.
Low magnification SFP usually wins out.
Benchrest SFP is the normal go-to but I still prefer high magnification FFP.
I prefer FFP for FT, EFT, NRL, speed events, and long range.
Even being FFP the new Helos G2 2-12x42 is a superb scope for fast shooting on low mag with no disadvantages that I can think of for hunting with an airgun because of a thicker reticle design.
I have two SFP scopes out of many rifle scopes if that says anything. One of them will be replaced with the Helos G2 2-12. The other rifle is a rare rifle with proprietary 1" detachable rings so SFP it is.
Which is better 17 cal ,22, 20, 25, 30, etc.
..........
If you will be on mid to higher magnifications most of the time FFP is generally easier for holds.
Low magnification SFP usually wins out.
Benchrest SFP is the normal go-to but I still prefer high magnification FFP.
I prefer FFP for FT, EFT, NRL, speed events, and long range.
Even being FFP the new Helos G2 2-12x42 is a superb scope for fast shooting on low mag with no disadvantages that I can think of for hunting with an airgun because of a thicker reticle design.
I have two SFP scopes out of many rifle scopes if that says anything. One of them will be replaced with the Helos G2 2-12. The other rifle is a rare rifle with proprietary 1" detachable rings so SFP it is.
Upvote 0
One is not better than the other. I prefer MOA 2nd focal plane for very precise target shooting, but I use MIL FFP for everything else. It comes down to personal preference and what you are comfortable with. With enough practice you can use any combination of 1st or 2nd focal plane & MOA or MIL for pretty much any application if your ret and turrets match and work correctly.
Upvote 0
Yes but sometimes the application can dictate which system can "better" suite a situation. The main one I can think of is PRS and NRL competitions. The immensely varied and dynamic stage designs dictate a more versatile optic that is good at nearly everything. Sometimes a stage must be shot with a wide FOV on say 8x-10x to locate and engage targets fast enough to finish a 90 second stage while still taking advantage of the precise holdoffs FFP offers. Basically it comes down to less thinking when using holdovers and holdoffs which most of the stages require to complete a stage in time. Of course SFP can be used for these matches too but it's not ideal for that application. Also there's enough thinking of how to attack a stage, load mags, write down dope, etc, and not having to think about one more thing like making sure you are on the correct magnification "is really nice"!!!
Upvote 0