OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Scopes > Rifle Scopes
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 1st fp vs 2nd in variable scope
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

1st fp vs 2nd in variable scope

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
st235 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: July/04/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 19
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote st235 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: 1st fp vs 2nd in variable scope
    Posted: May/14/2018 at 15:54
I tried to search this but got no results, I know it's been asked before. But If I buy a variable scope is the second plane that bad. Seems a lot of the scopes I want are second plane. Why I don't know because as far as I have learned the first plane is better.  Thanks: Steve
Back to Top
mike650 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 13606
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mike650 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/14/2018 at 16:44
What are you doing with the rifle scope, hunting, long distance shooting, punching paper.... ???
Fish to Live, Live to Hunt
Back to Top
Tip69 View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar
Tip Stick

Joined: September/27/2005
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 3802
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tip69 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/14/2018 at 16:47
depends on your intended use of said scope.   I don't own a first plane scope mostly because I don't need it... as I don't use the reticle to gauge distance.
take em!
Back to Top
supertool73 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar
Superstool

Joined: January/03/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 11127
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote supertool73 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/14/2018 at 16:54
First focal plane is better if you are using your reticle as a measuring tool or as a hold over tool.  If you are not using it for either of those things second works fine.

On my Leupold hunting scopes, I just use duplex reticles that are 2nd.  I use my rangefinder to find the distance and then dial in corrections.  So in my case 1st focal plane is not needed. 

It really does depend on how you want to use the scope and how much effort you want to put into practicing with that reticle. 
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."
Back to Top
Skylar McMahon View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
Capt. BlowHard

Joined: April/05/2011
Location: TEXAS
Status: Offline
Points: 6041
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Skylar McMahon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/14/2018 at 17:00
Depends on what you are doing. 

Second Focal Plane is widely popular among most hunters. In addition to that, since most hunting scenarios do not exceed a three hundred yard shot, the velocity with most calibers isn't going to be affected by the distance of your shot. In most cases the reticle is etched to be used on the highest available magnification, unless otherwise specified in your manual accompanying the scope. 

However, first focal plane reticles are relative to the target, regardless of what power setting is. I.E. while shooting targets and then when you determine you missed and use the reticle to determine by how much, the reticle is relative. 


As you would commonly magnify or demagnify your target, in second focal plane the reticle appears unchanged. 
For instance, here's a small target on 18X

Specifically, look at the top of the post in the 6 O'clock position. 

Now, here's the same target, demagnified and now on 10X. 

The reticle to your eye hasn't not changed, but look at the 6 o'clock post, that distance has. On FFP reticle that value wouldn't change. It would be the same no matter what the magnification is. 

Let me ask you, what would you be using it for?

Amat Victoria Curam
Back to Top
Son of Ed View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar

Joined: June/18/2011
Location: TEXAS
Status: Offline
Points: 65802
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Son of Ed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/14/2018 at 18:29
Tongue

The reticle in a first focal plane scope gets BIGGER as the power is increased!  
Visit the Ed Show
Back to Top
st235 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: July/04/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 19
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote st235 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/14/2018 at 18:40
Thanks a lot. that really helps clear things up. I will use it for hunting and long range shooting at a gong just for fun. the picture comparison was great. Second plane will work for me just fine. 
Back to Top
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 12428
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote koshkin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/14/2018 at 18:42
I wrote about this a little while back:
http://opticsthoughts.com/?p=1915
Back to Top
8shots View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar
Lord Of The Flies

Joined: March/14/2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Online
Points: 6070
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 8shots Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/15/2018 at 02:44
I briefly used a first focal plane scope. My experience was that unless you engaged big targets (man size, deer size, vehicle size) to judge distance the first focal reticle became to small to be of any use. I tried it on 6 inch steel plates and it was of no use.
Back to Top
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 12428
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote koshkin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/15/2018 at 03:48
Originally posted by 8shots 8shots wrote:

I briefly used a first focal plane scope. My experience was that unless you engaged big targets (man size, deer size, vehicle size) to judge distance the first focal reticle became to small to be of any use. I tried it on 6 inch steel plates and it was of no use.

That is not really correct.

Reticle design with FFP reticles is a bit more involved.  I suspect the FFP scope you tried was some sort of an archaic design.  Modern reticle designs have resolved this issue.

Still, for range estimation, it pays to use the largest object available to you.  Reticle rangefinding off of a 6 inch object is tricky with any scope and any reticle.

ILya
Back to Top
GiantGreg View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: February/22/2018
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GiantGreg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/15/2018 at 10:52
1st is great for target/ tactical/prs shooting. Makes holds easy. Not so great for at low power brush hunting. Reticle can get to thin an and lost in timber. That's where I prefer 2nd
Back to Top
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 12428
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote koshkin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/15/2018 at 11:07
Originally posted by GiantGreg GiantGreg wrote:

1st is great for target/ tactical/prs shooting. Makes holds easy. Not so great for at low power brush hunting. Reticle can get to thin an and lost in timber. That's where I prefer 2nd


As I said, it all comes down to reticle design and illumination quality.

Plenty of FFP scopes with fine across the magnification range.

ILya
Back to Top
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 15635
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RifleDude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/15/2018 at 12:59
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Originally posted by GiantGreg GiantGreg wrote:

1st is great for target/ tactical/prs shooting. Makes holds easy. Not so great for at low power brush hunting. Reticle can get to thin an and lost in timber. That's where I prefer 2nd


As I said, it all comes down to reticle design and illumination quality.

Plenty of FFP scopes with fine across the magnification range.

ILya


It also has a lot to do with zoom ratio as well. High zoom ratio scopes in FFP will show a much greater variance in how bold the reticle appears at lowest vs highest magnification vs a typical 1:4 zoom scope.
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.
Back to Top
GiantGreg View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: February/22/2018
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GiantGreg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/15/2018 at 13:17
Originally posted by RifleDude RifleDude wrote:

Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Originally posted by GiantGreg GiantGreg wrote:

1st is great for target/ tactical/prs shooting. Makes holds easy. Not so great for at low power brush hunting. Reticle can get to thin an and lost in timber. That's where I prefer 2nd


As I said, it all comes down to reticle design and illumination quality.

Plenty of FFP scopes with fine across the magnification range.

ILya


It also has a lot to do with zoom ratio as well. High zoom ratio scopes in FFP will show a much greater variance in how bold the reticle appears at lowest vs highest magnification vs a typical 1:4 zoom scope.
agreed. I got a razor ii 3-18, and I don't go below 5 usually because of how hard the reticle is to see at that magnification. Somnething like a 3-9 for with a little thicker reticle would be unstable at all power range.
It just depends on scope model to model and illum.
Back to Top
GiantGreg View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: February/22/2018
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GiantGreg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/15/2018 at 13:18
Sorry typo. 3-9 for be usable at all power
Back to Top
sambarman338 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: February/01/2012
Location: Melbourne, Aust
Status: Offline
Points: 47
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote sambarman338 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July/03/2018 at 07:09
Originally posted by koshkin koshkin wrote:

Originally posted by 8shots 8shots wrote:

I briefly used a first focal plane scope. My experience was that unless you engaged big targets (man size, deer size, vehicle size) to judge distance the first focal reticle became to small to be of any use. I tried it on 6 inch steel plates and it was of no use.

That is not really correct.

Reticle design with FFP reticles is a bit more involved.  I suspect the FFP scope you tried was some sort of an archaic design.  Modern reticle designs have resolved this issue.

Still, for range estimation, it pays to use the largest object available to you.  Reticle rangefinding off of a 6 inch object is tricky with any scope and any reticle.

ILya

I'm not sure how the modern FFP scopes get over the shrinking reticle but would like to put in a word for 'archaic design'. Until the late '50s in America and the '70s in Europe, most scopes were FFP because turning the knobs just moved the reticle itself, not the whole erector set in a spring-suspended Mini-me. The new system made the reticle appear constantly centred without any care in mounting - looks and seems great but leaves scopes exponentially more vulnerable to recoil damage.

How do the makers cope with that? Various improvements are constantly claimed (without the problem being explained) but their best trick is lifetime, no-questions-asked warranties, which give buyers a warm-and-fuzzy as long as they're not on safari when the scopes fail.

There is another advantage with FFP reticles, though, whether in the old or new systems. That is that FFP reticles are always at one with the country and critter behind it. With second-focal-plane variables this is not so, and if any slop develops in the power scroll (ahead of the reticle) the point of impact may vary at different magnifications. Makers say that they have conquered this problem - but they would, wouldn't they?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.191 seconds.