First or Second focal plane scope for hunting

[meigsbucks]

I’m considering a couple of scopes with the 1-8x magnification range. However, both are first focal plane. I know the difference between 1st and 2nd. I have looked at one of these ((Trijicon) and at 1x they look great, but as power is increased, the duplex gets really thick.
All of my hunting scopes are SFP and I do have one FFP target scope.
My question is do any of you use FFP scopes for your hunting or should I stick with SFP?

 

[Longwalker]

"Really thick" is subjective. Here's my take on the problem. I use FFP scopes on some of my rifles, and like them OK. The determining factor is what the reticle is like. I had a really nice Zeiss for a short while that had the opposite problem, the centre part of the reticle was so fine it was invisible against brush or dark fur at low power. I wish more manufacturers made tapered crosshairs like the Kaps "Invariant" which is the best of both worlds. Crosshairs that are "too thick" are not really a practical problem for hunting, but does tend to be disconcerting when target shooting. Since most hunters form their equipment judgements while target shooting the market trend is towards finer and finer centre cross hairs. You have to choose what you personally like, and can use effectively under all conditions.

 

[BourbonTrail]

My $0.02-

SFP, it’s more applicable over a range of zooms/magnifications that are encountered during hunting. The primary benefit of FFP is the ability to use your scope for ranging, secondary being the consistent application of ballistic drop identification regardless of zoom. That’s more important for rapid adjustment to long range (600+ yrd/m) shooting conditions than typical hunting conditions. Otherwise most FFP reticles are difficult to discern at lower zooms.

 

[Ray B]

With the FFP the reticle actually stays the same size relative to the target. the increase in size is because the reticle is magnified at the same rate that the magnification is increased. Bausch & Lomb encountered this with their Balvar 8 scopes- their solution was a tapered cross hair. In addition to the above mentioned range estimating ability of the FFP, it seems to me that there is less perceived movement due to parallax and varying positions of the eye when looking through the scope than there is with the SFP scopes.

 

[meigsbucks]

Thanks. Pretty much the only reason I was considering the FFP, was that the scopes I was considering are about the only 1-8x scopes (that I consider good quality) within my budget. The Zeiss and Swaro 1-8x are out of my league.
I‘ll probably stick with a SFP in 1-6x or 2-10x.

 

[shootist~]

To my eye a First Focal reticle is nice and solid at higher powers, but gets too thin at lower powers.

FFP has its uses for mid to longer range shooting when reticle holds are used instead of dialing. And of course with FFP, the reticle substentions work equally at any power - provided you can see them. Optical quality matters.

Either can work for hunting, but if on a budget I would avoid FFP.

 

[ldmay375]

I’m considering a couple of scopes with the 1-8x magnification range. However, both are first focal plane. I know the difference between 1st and 2nd. I have looked at one of these ((Trijicon) and at 1x they look great, but as power is increased, the duplex gets really thick.
All of my hunting scopes are SFP and I do have one FFP target scope.
My question is do any of you use FFP scopes for your hunting or should I stick with SFP?

I use 1st & 2nd focal plane scopes. I suppose it depends on the distances you will be shooting and the size of the target to make a difference, and the scope specific reticle.
I have a few non-illuminated 1st focal plane that I really like for low light use. I also have a few non-illuminated 2nd focal plane that I like for the same purpose.
I am not a long range shooter. I tend to prefer rather heavy reticles. If illuminated, I like a Very low setting for the illumination.

 

[Angelo_orygun]

Thanks. Pretty much the only reason I was considering the FFP, was that the scopes I was considering are about the only 1-8x scopes (that I consider good quality) within my budget. The Zeiss and Swaro 1-8x are out of my league.
I‘ll probably stick with a SFP in 1-6x or 2-10x.

Something else to consider, besides FFP or SFP: Most 1-8 scopes in FFP are designed for the “tactical” shooter and have large exposed turrets resulting in a much heavier weight that a traditional hunting scope. That may or not be a consideration for your…

 

[Goose Cracker]

Thanks. Pretty much the only reason I was considering the FFP, was that the scopes I was considering are about the only 1-8x scopes (that I consider good quality) within my budget. The Zeiss and Swaro 1-8x are out of my league.
I‘ll probably stick with a SFP in 1-6x or 2-10x.

I have both, I strongly prefer SFP for hunting. Just get the 2-10x and don't look back.