Reply To: First focal plane vs “traditional “ reticle

Forums Optics, Scopes, Rings, & Mounts First focal plane vs “traditional “ reticle Reply To: First focal plane vs “traditional “ reticle

Link

Centercut
Participant
Member

Interesting. And of course, an opinion about the quality of one compared to the other. I don’t have a FFP scope, so I can’t compare. I do know you’d have to spend many thousands of $ like Matt Dubber (his Nightforce costs $3600) to get a scope with better glass than the Vortex Razor HD LH 3-15×42 that I got for about $600. Its SFP, side focus, etched reticle, lightweight, etc…

But I can say that most of my guns are zero’d at 42 yards (for my .22s and .177s – the .30 is zero’d at 50 meters), and that gives me a point blank of 15 to about 50 yards. Doesn’t matter what I have the magnification at, just put the crosshairs on the target and shoot.
It also depends on if you use holdover, or dial a yardage (elevation turret).

With holdover, if the target is greater than 50 yards, I spot the target, get the yardage, then dial to the magnification that the scope is calibrated at (usually the highest mag that the scope has – the only ones I know of that are 10X are Hawke and MTC), then ensure correct holdover and take the shot. Perhaps since I don’t use extreme mag, and my scopes are up to 15x or 16x, its sensible to do it that way.

With dial a yardage, I’d get nothing from an FFP scope. On my .30 Bobcat with Hawke Sidewinder 6.5-20×42 scope, I have it set up with an accessory elevation knob that has yardages marked on it. So once I get the yardage with my laser rangefinder, I dial up the yardage, put the crosshairs on the target, and take the shot. It doesn’t matter what mag I have the scope on. FFP, SFP, doesn’t really matter in this case.

Just some food for thought…
Mike