1st focal plane vs. 2nd focal plane?

[zhunter]

OK, what is the difference?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?

Thanks

[Alaskapopo]

A first focal plane scope puts the target and reticle on the same focal plane which means as you increase or degrease the magnification the reticle grows and shrinks. The advantage of this is your hold over marks are always consisten regardless of the magnification setting your on. The down side is the reticle is hard to see on low power and can cover too much (not as precise) on max power.

A second focal plane has the reticle behind the magnifier and the reticle always appears to be the same size as you crank the power up or down. The advantage of this is you can be more precise with it on max power and on low power the reticle covers more of the target and is easier to see allowing you to shoot faster. The down side is your hold over marks are only accurate on max power.

pat

[zhunter]

Alaskapopo

Thanks, I been wondering about that for a few weeks now.

Correct me if I am wrong, but in the usage of a 2nd focal plane scope, if it is a distant target then you would most likely be on max power would you not?

[Alaskapopo]

Alaskapopo

Thanks, I been wondering about that for a few weeks now.

Correct me if I am wrong, but in the usage of a 2nd focal plane scope, if it is a distant target then you would most likely be on max power would you not?

Yes I think so at least with three gun low power variable scopes. I think that the first focal plane is a great thing on a precision rifle scope (higher magnification) were shooting on the fly at targets at various ranges on the clock. However in three gun I personally think the first focal plane scopes have more cons than pros. Just my opinion. Many good shooters on here disagree.

Pat

[kurtm]

Not as far as I'm concerned Pat!

[denn1911]

kurtm, do you find the FFP better for 3 Gun matches? What are your thoughts?

[target1911]

I was looking for the same answer just yesterday. You beat me to posting.

[hitman_usmc]

Couldn't have said it better myself Pat.

[ninemmbill]

kurtm, do you find the FFP better for 3 Gun matches? What are your thoughts?

Kurt doesn't need no stinking scope.

Edited August 5, 2012 by ninemmbill

[kurtm]

I was agreeing with Pat. For low powered scopes I don't like first focal plain. Heck you can't even see the reticle until you get to 4x or so, so what does it really do?

[Graham Smith]

This is one of those topics that can be argued to death and I have read a number of the discussions. One caveat, I can really only speak to this from the point of view of long range shooting but the rationale doesn't change that much.

By long range shooting, I'm referring to 500yds and beyond and not to any kind of 3-gun or action shooting. In this scenario, there can be a couple advantages to a FFP scope. In particular, a FFP scope with a mil-dot or ranging reticle. And even more particularly a scope with the same graduations on the reticle and the turret. IOW, a Mil/Mil or MOA/MOA scope. In this case, a FFP scope will do two things for you.

--It will let you use the reticle to range the target at any power. A SFP scope can only be used to range at a specific power and that may or may not be the max power.

--Going along with that, a FFP scope will allow you make adjustments easier. If you see that you are hitting 1 mil low, you can quickly dial in a 1 mil correction on the turret. No math, no guessing.

With a lower power scope, I'm not sure that any of this applies. But there may be circumstances that have not occurred to me. I will say that the one big disadvantage to a FFP scope, particlularly one with a broad range of magnification, is that the reticle can be too fine at lower power and too coarse at higher power. Finding the right balance can be tough and expensive.

[RippSpeed]

I choose to go with an FFP scope because I like shooting targets below a 100 yards with iron sights. and anything over I use my Bushnell on its max settings. I figure since its going to be stuck @ 6.5x anyway; why not get the ffp because I have the option of using it at 1x as a red dot, if I want to with both my eyes open. And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

[dlouie87]

I choose to go with an FFP scope because I like shooting targets below a 100 yards with iron sights. and anything over I use my Bushnell on its max settings. I figure since its going to be stuck @ 6.5x anyway; why not get the ffp because I have the option of using it at 1x as a red dot, if I want to with both my eyes open. And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

what FFP scope are you running?

[RippSpeed]

I choose to go with an FFP scope because I like shooting targets below a 100 yards with iron sights. and anything over I use my Bushnell on its max settings. I figure since its going to be stuck @ 6.5x anyway; why not get the ffp because I have the option of using it at 1x as a red dot, if I want to with both my eyes open. And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

what FFP scope are you running?

I'm running the Bushnell Elite Tactical 1-6.5x witha BTR1 ... Its a good scope good glass but just eye box is very very sensitive

[Alaskapopo]

I choose to go with an FFP scope because I like shooting targets below a 100 yards with iron sights. and anything over I use my Bushnell on its max settings. I figure since its going to be stuck @ 6.5x anyway; why not get the ffp because I have the option of using it at 1x as a red dot, if I want to with both my eyes open. And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

what FFP scope are you running?

I'm running the Bushnell Elite Tactical 1-6.5x witha BTR1 ... Its a good scope good glass but just eye box is very very sensitive

Is that first of second focal plane?

Pat

[RippSpeed]

I choose to go with an FFP scope because I like shooting targets below a 100 yards with iron sights. and anything over I use my Bushnell on its max settings. I figure since its going to be stuck @ 6.5x anyway; why not get the ffp because I have the option of using it at 1x as a red dot, if I want to with both my eyes open. And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

what FFP scope are you running?

I'm running the Bushnell Elite Tactical 1-6.5x witha BTR1 ... Its a good scope good glass but just eye box is very very sensitive

Is that first of second focal plane?

Pat

I think your asking me is it first focal or second focal plane.

I got the First Focal Plane

[dlouie87]

I choose to go with an FFP scope because I like shooting targets below a 100 yards with iron sights. and anything over I use my Bushnell on its max settings. I figure since its going to be stuck @ 6.5x anyway; why not get the ffp because I have the option of using it at 1x as a red dot, if I want to with both my eyes open. And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

what FFP scope are you running?

I'm running the Bushnell Elite Tactical 1-6.5x witha BTR1 ... Its a good scope good glass but just eye box is very very sensitive

Ok, I just dont know if I should get that or go with a meopta (400 cheaper) or wait on the Vortex 1-6.5.

-Dan

[Graham Smith]

And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

The focal plane of the reticle has nothing to do with the zero. Unless you are doing ranging with a reticle (i.e. the distance between hash marks = x inches), there is no inherent advantage to a FFP reticle.

[RippSpeed]

And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

The focal plane of the reticle has nothing to do with the zero. Unless you are doing ranging with a reticle (i.e. the distance between hash marks = x inches), there is no inherent advantage to a FFP reticle.

Hows that ???

First Focal Plane you zero on any magnification. You go thru out the full spectrum of magnification on the scope your zero'd...

On a Second Focal Plane you zero @ max magnification and do math to adjust for lower magnifications, correct ???

And yes I am ranging with the recticle...

[Outsydlooknin75]

And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

The focal plane of the reticle has nothing to do with the zero. Unless you are doing ranging with a reticle (i.e. the distance between hash marks = x inches), there is no inherent advantage to a FFP reticle.

Hows that ???

First Focal Plane you zero on any magnification. You go thru out the full spectrum of magnification on the scope your zero'd...

On a Second Focal Plane you zero @ max magnification and do math to adjust for lower magnifications, correct ???

And yes I am ranging with the recticle...

A zero'd scope is a zero'd scope no matter the magnification.

Change the "zero" when talking in the second part to "ranging" and you are correct.

A propper working scope zero'd on max mag or anywhere else wether a ffp or a sfp is zero'd and the zero is not going to change depending on magnification.

Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk 2

[RippSpeed]

And its great if your new to scopes like me ... you would just use max power and zero it in and forget about it. While sfp you have to do the math... And math is not my strong suit

The focal plane of the reticle has nothing to do with the zero. Unless you are doing ranging with a reticle (i.e. the distance between hash marks = x inches), there is no inherent advantage to a FFP reticle.

Hows that ???

First Focal Plane you zero on any magnification. You go thru out the full spectrum of magnification on the scope your zero'd...

On a Second Focal Plane you zero @ max magnification and do math to adjust for lower magnifications, correct ???

And yes I am ranging with the recticle...

A zero'd scope is a zero'd scope no matter the magnification.

Change the "zero" when talking in the second part to "ranging" and you are correct.

A propper working scope zero'd on max mag or anywhere else wether a ffp or a sfp is zero'd and the zero is not going to change depending on magnification.

Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk 2

maybe my wording is incorrect ... but in FFP; I zero @ max and my calculations for bullet drop/distance is still good no matter what magnification. While on a SFP scope the calculation for bullet drop/distance is different @ different magnifications; unless its at the magnification you zero'd at, correct ??? So when I say doing math ... I would have to do alot more math with a SFP than a FFP correct ???

[Graham Smith]

maybe my wording is incorrect ...

Yes, it is. You are mixing up two things. A zero, is a zero, is a zero - regardless of magnification.

Bullet Drop Compensation is another thing entirely. In that case, you ARE using the reticle for ranging. IOW, the distance between two marks on the reticle translates to a specific amount of drop that you are compensating for. You are correct that in a FFP scope, the BDC functions the same at all powers whereas in a SFP scope it does not. However, that is frequently not going to be an issue because at distance you will almost always have the scope at max magnification.

Your mileage may vary.

[AlamoShooter]

I thing the value of a FFP scope over the traditional American SFP scope hinges on the Reticle. IF the scope has a reticle that is shaped rite and the scope is at 1 X it can be easy to use. it the reticle is shaped like an + and as all you see is the small + thin its not much good.

Its No secrete that I like the Vortex Razor FFP scope and the reticle. some call it busy. At 1X I use the entire center as my aim reference on full targets under 50 yards. The scope is faster to the targets than my trigger finger is on the trigger.

The reticle looks like this

I don't have any photos past 70yards but, at 4x it looks like this

It just takes a short learning curve to realized the benefits of a FFP scope. = If I can learn it quick any one can learn it

The only draw backs I can think of to a FFP scope is that its very hard to make the lighting as bright as a SFP scope. and the FFP scope cost 5% more than the SFP

I will be happy guy when Vortex's new 1-6 is available in a FFP,

[Alaskapopo]

I thing the value of a FFP scope over the traditional American SFP scope hinges on the Reticle. IF the scope has a reticle that is shaped rite and the scope is at 1 X it can be easy to use. it the reticle is shaped like an + and as all you see is the small + thin its not much good.

Its No secrete that I like the Vortex Razor FFP scope and the reticle. some call it busy. At 1X I use the entire center as my aim reference on full targets under 50 yards. The scope is faster to the targets than my trigger finger is on the trigger.

The reticle looks like this

I don't have any photos past 70yards but, at 4x it looks like this

It just takes a short learning curve to realized the benefits of a FFP scope. = If I can learn it quick any one can learn it

The only draw backs I can think of to a FFP scope is that its very hard to make the lighting as bright as a SFP scope. and the FFP scope cost 5% more than the SFP

I will be happy guy when Vortex's new 1-6 is available in a FFP,

Two drawbacks to the FFP scopes I listed earlier. 1. The reticle is generally hard to see on low power because it gets smaller as you crank the magnificaiton down. 2. It covers too much of the target on max power. I actually like the fact on second focal plane scopes that the reticle covers more of the target on lower power. With my Swaro the 1.5 moa dot on 6x becomes a 9moa dot on 1x which makes for some fast shooting up close. Same reason pistol shooters prefer larger red dots for speed up close.

Pat

[Stlhead]

I have developed a new concept in optics that melds the best traits of first and second focal planes. Unlimited eye relief, constant reticle size that is user adjustable, inexpensive. The only draw backs are that it is very sensitive to cheek weld, and will delaminate if used in the rain. I know other people may have considered it, but I am actually going to put them into production. There will be a group buy announced soon for those that want to be early adopters. The main tube will be made from the finest toilet paper tubes available (charmin), and the reticle will be formed with name brand dental floss and actual scotch brand tape. No fancy Larue mounts are required as each scope will come with an entire roll of black duct tape (it has got to be black, or it would not be tactical yo). In testing I have found that while the optic is not as durable as many on the market, it more than makes up for that small flaw by being inexpensive as well as user serviceable. Even in the most remote parts of the country you can still find the basic raw materials required to rebuild your scope! I will now begin spamming the internet with the tales of how my new product is superior to all others. Every time someone starts a new thread about what scope should I buy I will pipe up with how my cardboard scope is the only one that you can win with, and why I think it is the best. There will also be limited sponsorship opportunities available for those lucky and elite few who are able to properly articulate the many benefits of this wonderful new product to the shooting public. The only thing that has been troubling me about this exciting new idea is what to call it. I have so far been unable to come up with a suitable go fast cool guy name for this revolutionary new optical product, as such I am offering a 50% discount to the person that comes up with a hip name for my toilet paper tube scope. I will be ordering fancy logo shirts soon.