FPS scope
- Thread starter joewr
- Start date
Guess it would depend on what type of shooting you do.
I've been slowly switching over to FFP as cash allows.
I don't have to worry about holdovers changing with the magnification.
My soul reason for switching.
I've been slowly switching over to FFP as cash allows.
I don't have to worry about holdovers changing with the magnification.
My soul reason for switching.
Upvote 0
I used to use really nice Nikon 2nd focal plane scopes..
When shooting target at my club, I usually ran full magnification. Zero's in, I could hit a fly at 75 yards.
But, say a squirrel ran in front of me that was only 20 feet away, I could line the x-hairs on it and miss..
Why? Because they move w/ magnification.. If I drop the mag way down to get the squirrel in view,
I'd also have to re-zero a bit..
So, since I personally shoot targets at many different distances, I finally gave up on the extra adjusting,
and I switched over to Discovery 1st focal plane scopes.
It doesn't matter the distance or magnification amount - the x-hairs always stay on point..
How? Because with 1st focal - The x-hairs 'adjust size' as the magnification changes.
Then with 2nd focal, - The x-hairs stay the same size - But the image changes when zooming in/out.
IMO, it's a preference thing, and as mentioned above, also depends on what type of shooting you do.
Sam -
PS: Here's a nice 'visual' to go along with my 'probably not so good explanation'.
When shooting target at my club, I usually ran full magnification. Zero's in, I could hit a fly at 75 yards.
But, say a squirrel ran in front of me that was only 20 feet away, I could line the x-hairs on it and miss..
Why? Because they move w/ magnification.. If I drop the mag way down to get the squirrel in view,
I'd also have to re-zero a bit..
So, since I personally shoot targets at many different distances, I finally gave up on the extra adjusting,
and I switched over to Discovery 1st focal plane scopes.
It doesn't matter the distance or magnification amount - the x-hairs always stay on point..
How? Because with 1st focal - The x-hairs 'adjust size' as the magnification changes.
Then with 2nd focal, - The x-hairs stay the same size - But the image changes when zooming in/out.
IMO, it's a preference thing, and as mentioned above, also depends on what type
Sam -
PS: Here's a nice 'visual' to go along with my 'probably not so good explanation'.
Upvote 0
https://www.airgunnation.com/topic/ffp-at-4x-8x-and-12x-comparison/#post-471712
A real life photos of FFP at 4x, 8x and 12x. Target is a ground squirrel at 76 yards. Phone does not take really good photos, but should give you an idea of what to expect.
A real life photos of FFP at 4x, 8x and 12x. Target is a ground squirrel at 76 yards. Phone does not take really good photos, but should give you an idea of what to expect.
Upvote 0
I am a member of this camp. For me it’s not so much about the money though, It’s about the optical quality and simplicity.Upvote 0
There is a poopload of videos on this on YouTube too many to just recommend one. I have both types of scopes I prefer FFP for hunting SFP for everthing else but they both work for me.
Upvote 0
I mirror much of the positive statements here concerning FFP. I will say that some FFP scopes do an excellent job of keeping zero as you change magnification. This has certainly been the case for my Athlon Argos. It was one of the first things I checked, accuracy while changing the magnification and parallax.
Upvote 0
No one NEEDS a FFP scope, We've been living with SFP's for years. So to modify the question, what's different and why do I want it.
DirtiDovi showed the difference, but why is it awesome? Simple, it's the MATH!
When calculating hold over or under, a SFP scope shows currect MIL or MOA distances at 10X (Typically). If you are at 5X, you need to adjust your holdover to compensate. That's where the math comes in. You gotta multiply and divide to figure your hold over.
FFP Scopes show accurate MIL and MOA measurements at ALL magnifications. No math.
If you don't hold over or under, no problem. Get either scope and you'll be happy.
If you do calculate holds, both work, but FFP is simpler. It's a matter of convenience, and not having to do the math.
DirtiDovi showed the difference, but why is it awesome? Simple, it's the MATH!
When calculating hold over or under, a SFP scope shows currect MIL or MOA distances at 10X (Typically). If you are at 5X, you need to adjust your holdover to compensate. That's where the math comes in. You gotta multiply and divide to figure your hold over.
FFP Scopes show accurate MIL and MOA measurements at ALL magnifications. No math.
If you don't hold over or under, no problem. Get either scope and you'll be happy.
If you do calculate holds, both work, but FFP is simpler. It's a matter of convenience, and not having to do the math.
Upvote 0
10x is correct for SFP scopes with standard mil-dot reticles. SFP scopes with other MRAD or MOA reticles use various magnifications where the stadia represent milliradians or minutes-of-angle. Some SFP scopes with MOA reticle do use 10x (but NOT Typically).
Upvote 0
For me for “hunting or pesting” I now prefer FFP, I use my scope throughout its magnification range. My hit ratio definitely went up, I do use my hash marks for hold over and windage. Prior when using SFP scopes and not understanding the math of the hash marks changing value with varying magnification I had some unexplained misses. That at the time I thought should have been hits. I read up on the difference between the two and made my choice. Either way a fun choice to make, good luck.
Upvote 0
Good clarification. Typically, is my own experience which is only a few scopes. That clarification makes the case for FFP stronger (IMHO). If different scopes use different magnifications as their base, then each scope would have slightly different math to get the hold correct.
I'm too lazy. FFP for me!
Upvote 0
I use FFP scopes almost exclusively. The exception(s) I have are for shooting known distance target matches or very long range shooting where I just dial everything up to center. I personally believe that FFP long range scopes compared to SFP long range scopes seem to suffer somewhat in clarity and getting dark at high magnification i.e. 35x and up but that could just be subjective comparing my March FX 5-40x56 FFP to a Trijicon Accupower 5-50x56 SFP. Both outstanding scopes BTW.
Upvote 0
I personally find it more convenient and it limits the math you have to do on the fly if you aren't at the ideal mag for a SFP optic.
Upvote 0