First Focal Plane vs Second for Plains Game

[JoeSoap]

I have settled on a 3 x18 scope for a backcountry rifle. I was leaning towards a 1st focal plane as I felt it would be a bit more versatile if using at longer ranges, hunting plains game or target practice, but got the impression that most hunting scopes for any mid range are 2nd focal plane. Is a 1st focal plane scope a bad idea for a hunting scope? Thanks

 

[farmer_john]

I have settled on a 3 x18 scope for a backcountry rifle. I was leaning towards a 1st focal plane as I felt it would be a bit more versatile if using at longer ranges, hunting plains game or target practice, but got the impression that most hunting scopes for any mid range are 2nd focal plane. Is a 1st focal plane scope a bad idea for a hunting scope? Thanks

I personaly use them. But there not for everyone

Some the bigger differences
1st focal plane reticle appears to grow/shrink as you zoom keeping the measurments the same on all magnifications.
2nd focal plane the mils are only 1 to1 on a set power (usually max magnification)
So your 3x18 the distance between 1 mil at x18 will be 3.6 inches at 100m
X9 will be 7.2
X3 will be 21.6 inches.
Thats 1 mil space from dot to dot. Half mil marks will correspond equally.

This may or may not be an issue for hold offs or ranging for you depending on how your going to use it and practice i used 2nd focal plane most my mil career witbout issue.


1st focal planes at lower mags can be hard to read mills 1x ffps work alot like a red dot at 1x

But if your doing alot of longer rangenshooting there both a good choice. 1st focal plane gives same reading at all magnifications 2nd keeps reticle size consistant across all mags. Its all personal preference and what youbwant to learn with at end of the day.

 

[Nhoro]

What Farmer_john said + I think FFP are useful for Shooters that hold for distance and wind because 1 mil is 1 mil at all magnifications. SFP is useful for people who dial distance and windage because the crosshairs remain the same size at all magnifications. And if you are dialing, you don't worry about mil spacing and aiming off so much. So pick a scope to suit your style.

 

[Hififile324]

Keep it "Simple"! Don't try to do distance math in your head while your animal walks away!

 

[Hogpatrol]

Agree with @farmer_john's "not for everyone". Can only speak for RSA and those areas that are the wide open spaces and myself in the U.S. hunting varmints at longer ranges. In my RSA experience generally there was no big rush to make the shot so I went with FFP moa reticle with a dope chart. I dial for elevation and use the reticle grid for wind correction. With FFP, close shots at low power, the grid is reduced enough as to not be of any value for holdovers. If you go the FFP route, I'd get one with illumination so at lower powers there'll be a lit dot or center. Whatever is chosen, good to get a generous amount of experience at different ranges.

 

[migrabill]

I could be wrong, but I use illuminated reticles and to me at least I think that reduces the difference between FFP and SFP.

 

[CBH Australia]

The first 2 answers explain it well.
If you are a long range shooter and you use an FFP on the range and know how you would estimate range etc you would make use of it.
Either way a DOPE chart would be beneficial and you can hold over/Holdoff with the right reticle or you can twist turrets in either SFP or FFP.

The reticle, the turret type and use will all be factors of finding the right scope for you.

 

[farmer_john]

Agree with @farmer_john's "not for everyone". Can only speak for RSA and those areas that are the wide open spaces and myself in the U.S. hunting varmints at longer ranges. In my RSA experience generally there was no big rush to make the shot so I went with FFP moa reticle with a dope chart. I dial for elevation and use the reticle grid for wind correction. With FFP, close shots at low power, the grid is reduced enough as to not be of any value for holdovers. If you go the FFP route, I'd get one with illumination so at lower powers there'll be a lit dot or center. Whatever is chosen, good to get a generous amount of experience at different ranges.

The main purpose of a mil reticle is not just for holdoffs but for ranging a target.

Ill do the math for most folks used tonunches vs all metric. Using my old z10 dope

You take tge known inches of a target x25.4 / the number of mils in the crosshair gives you distance to target in meter ( laser rang finders are cheating lol) from there you can use your dope to hold or adjust.
With ffp that measuring metric is 100% the same on x3 as x18
On 2nd its 1 mil @x18 (for reference were using 100m distance)
So 1 mil is 3.6 inches at 100m/yds
If you put a sfp scope on say 3x while reticle is the same. Its now 21.6 inches between the dots at 100m/yds
And as you stepp it up each aditional 100m/yd increment that adds a +1 to your multiplier. At 1000 thats a difference between

36 inches and 216 inches between each 1 mil hash mark.

For adjustments its all the same at 500m you adjust up 3.5mil or 1.1mil for windage for ffp or on sfp.
And you can use the reticle for same on holdoffs. But the difference on sfo with diff magnification

On 3x for holdoffs at 500m
.7mil holdoff elevation .25 for wind

Its all doable just something you have to stay aware if. As if your ranging on the wrong magnification it will not be a 1x1 it will be 1x2 or 1x6 per mil and thatbwill screw up your math


Its been a while and late here so if my mathsboff thats why so feel free to correct if im off a bit

 

[Sabre]

A good chunk of people buy things because an "expert" online gives advice that really only applies to "experts", but push it for the average every-man. Usually to help sell a product they get money for in some way or another.

You have to be honest with yourself about your own abilities and what you will use the scope for.
The reality is they will both work.

FFP scopes can be hard to pick up the crosshairs on lowest power. They have been pushed online as the only thing real shooters shoot. Often making SFP sound completely useless.

The odd thing is, the majority of hunters who are shooting at long distance, are dialing. Or, alternatively trying to set their gun up for MPBR, or a combination of the two. And the majority of hunters aren't very experienced or good at judging wind or adjusting for it. These things make FFP fairly pointless for a huge chunk of hunters.

This has led to a massive amount of guys sitting in tree stands in thick woods where shots are 80 yards max with FFP scopes with 25X zoom.

Obviously there are lots of people and hunters who are very skilled in long range shooting, using/calculating holdovers, making wind calls, etc. But the majority of hunters are not.

All of this means, for most hunters, if you AREN'T going to practice a lot, learn to calculate, take a kestrel with you, etc, most hunters would be better served with a SFP that they can dial or set to MPBR or both, and having your dope chart of how many inches to adjust for wind.
Having a reticle that is easy to see in all zoom and all environments will be more beneficial to you than having a reticle you won't actually use to it's capabilities but handicaps you at certain distances and environments.

 

[samson7x]

I’m a fan of FFP for the purpose you describe. The key is finding a reticle that’s useable at low power if you’re in thicker wooded environments. That’s where illumination can be helpful. Having said that, I’ll contradict myself a bit by going with a SFP Nightforce 2-10 on my backcountry setup. Thought process there is if I’m shooting at ranges that require dialing, I’ll be at 10x anyway. Any more mag on the top end and I’d rather go FFP though.

 

[Bandera]

Keep it simple.
Leupold VX5 or VX6 with CDS system. Range it, dial it, shoot it.
Keep your hunting reticle simple and clean.

 

[Russ16]

I prefer to dial but both have advantages.

Personally I think it FFP makes more sense and you go to scopes with higher magnifications. If you have a 2-10x scope and are shooting at long range you probably have it cranked all the way up and SFO is going to be fine. If you have a scope with a top magnification of 25x your might be spotting or shooting at something with it set on 20 or something else below max magnification at which point the FFP is desirable. A scope with max magnification of 18x is probably right on the borderline of that equation.

 

[migrabill]

Keep it simple.
Leupold VX5 or VX6 with CDS system. Range it, dial it, shoot it.
Keep your hunting reticle simple and clean.

But are they FFP or SFP?

 

[Rule 303]

Why do you need Mil's. Inch's are just as useable when adjusting and finer. Just depends on what you are used to is my take.

 

[farmer_john]

Why do you need Mil's. Inch's are just as useable when adjusting and finer. Just depends on what you are used to is my take.

They make mildot scopes calibrated in moa as well.
Mil is just where it started and and tge reference point im able to talk about as thats how thebarmy does it. The equation is similar to the mil formulas. But i dont know it only meters/mil for distsnce and inches/mil for distsnce but there is inch/moa formula and you can get moa reticle and turrets.

 

[mark-hunter]

Is a 1st focal plane scope a bad idea for a hunting scope? Thanks

My first choice is 1st focal plane. If I shoot in low light conditions, increase of thickness of crosshair with power is welcome feature, especially with some dark or bush background.

But modern long range hunting frenzy influenced new products entering the market.
And some of my hunting scopes are 2nd focal plane. They are still usable.
I use them. But I am not impressed.
Thin crosshairs is not my favourite.

I must say I do not hunt long range.
My maximum shooting distance in hunting is 200 meters.

Long range game I play only at paper targets

 

[Rule 303]

They make mildot scopes calibrated in moa as well.
Mil is just where it started and and tge reference point im able to talk about as thats how thebarmy does it. The equation is similar to the mil formulas. But i dont know it only meters/mil for distsnce and inches/mil for distsnce but there is inch/moa formula and you can get moa reticle and turrets.

I am aware of this. What I am getting at is .25 of an inch is more precis than 1 Mil and can be used for ranging as well. I get the military (well, the army) using Mil as they navigate in Mils not degrees and can make ranging easier. I have used both Mils and Degrees when navigating. Mils is good on foot Degrees are good when flying.

When I have a choice in rifle scopes I go for MOA. Easy enough to workout hold over or hold off with my Nightforce NXS scopes.

 

[farmer_john]

I am aware of this. What I am getting at is .25 of an inch is more precis than 1 Mil and can be used for ranging as well. I get the military (well, the army) using Mil as they navigate in Mils not degrees and can make ranging easier. I have used both Mils and Degrees when navigating. Mils is good on foot Degrees are good when flying.

When I have a choice in rifle scopes I go for MOA. Easy enough to workout hold over or hold off with my Nightforce NXS scopes.

Ya except its .1 mil clicks vs .25 moa
.359 inches vs .25
It is slightly coarser but functionally it is irrelevant.

 

[revturbo9967]

I use FFP on everything other then a .22 no matter what the game animal.

 

[Wyfox]

I have all FFP on all my LR hunting rifles, I use the reticle for wind holds and dial for distance. Illumination is a must on FFP.

All my scopes are Mil too, not a fan of MOA. If I need to dial 2.3 mil for a shot its 23 clicks, pretty easy...