wb3jma
Active Member
So I'm a novice scope user and I may end up returning the Bushnell Banner 4-12X AO I just got. Really what I'm concerned about is what does a novice user find easiest for zero and aiming?
FFP vs SFP
- Thread starter wb3jma
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
The advantage (to me) of FFP is that holdovers are accurate throughout the magnification range, whereas SFP only at max magnification (although it can be something else on some models).
I have both, and have yet to have that limitation on SFP be a problem. That said, I decided a few years ago that aside from something like a ML scope or a beater for one of my kids, I’m sticking to FFP.
Do you anticipate needing to use the holdover marks to estimate range, or compensate for distance when at leas than max magnification? If not, then probably better to save some coin and buy SFP.
Kicken Wing
Snakes and Sparklers
I am sure that a lot of people with far more knowledge of scopes will chime in, as I am not an expert by any means. I will say that I side with KIBarrister in regards to having a reticle on the first focal plane as well as his reasons. I just got a vortex strike eagle 5-25x56 for a 6.5 Creed moor and it is my first scope with a FFP reticle. There is a big difference in price though compared to the Bushnell that you have.
I am also a big fan of using what I have, learning the ins and outs and getting the best out of my purchase. Should you decide to step up to another tier in the future, you have something that you can compare it too. The "wow" factor kicks in when you upgrade.
So what are you shooting? Targets? Hunting? What caliber? What distances?
wb3jma
Active Member
One of the problems I'm finding besides the sometimes bewildering amount of options to go for and I found out the hard way with my red dot is that these things can some times be hard to answer unless you have the scope(s) in front of you and really tell the difference.
This is for a Mossberg Patriot in .270 Win and for hunting. In Maryland from what I gather this means typically hunting in the range of 75 to 150 yards with average at 100 yards. However if I ever want to go west and maybe hunt larger game we are generally doubling that.
So your questions is a good one because as a novice shooting from a scope I don't know if I really want to be trying to estimate holdover and the FFP which keeps both recticle size and holdovers the same through the range of magnification. The only limitation seem to be shooting shorter ranges where FFP tend to fix for paralax at 100 yrds. At shorter ranges the SFP seems to be a better choice and maybe again if you zero it for 100 yrds and shooting less than that than estimating is probably rather easy.
This is for a Mossberg Patriot in .270 Win and for hunting. In Maryland from what I gather this means typically hunting in the range of 75 to 150 yards with average at 100 yards. However if I ever want to go west and maybe hunt larger game we are generally doubling that.
So your questions is a good one because as a novice shooting from a scope I don't know if I really want to be trying to estimate holdover and the FFP which keeps both recticle size and holdovers the same through the range of magnification. The only limitation seem to be shooting shorter ranges where FFP tend to fix for paralax at 100 yrds. At shorter ranges the SFP seems to be a better choice and maybe again if you zero it for 100 yrds and shooting less than that than estimating is probably rather easy.
Hello - If this rifle is for hunting, get an SFP. With an FFP, the reticle subtensions stay the same, but the size of the reticle changes with the magnification. At 4x, which where you will probably have it for most hunting, the reticle will be dramatically smaller and appear distant. FFP scopes are useful for rifle competitions like PRS matches where you are on the clock and making shots at targets at different ranges. For those events, estimating the range with the reticle is faster than using the elevation knob to dial in the range. An FFP reticle is for a specialized purpose, and unless you need it for that, I would recommend you not go there.
FFP if you’re going to be shooting long range, and no - double x 150 or 300 yds is not long range. At typical hunting range around here, as you mentioned, at low magnification you’ll hate FFP, as the reticle will be clumped up and you won’t be able to aim properly, you’ll have to increase magnification to a # possibly more than you want or need just to open up the reticle to be able to see the aim point. SFP worked fine for me on my 1st long range rifle and class. I dialed all elevations so the mil dot stadia sizes didn’t bother me (no holding over for elevations) and when we ranged unknown distance targets, I just had to dial to the recommended (max magnification in my case) to “mil” my targets, which I was dead nuts on btw.
For hunting, I don’t think you can go wrong with either, but my $.02 - I prefer 2FP in my hunting scopes.
Last edited:
- Feb 4, 2013
- 28,175
Mighty Joboo
Member
- Sep 15, 2020
- 52
I agree 100%.
Go SFP. FFP generally gives up some eyebox and field of view, all else being equal.
With typical hunting ranges, especially out here, you simply will not need to utilize most BDC reticles, you will be "point blank range" within about 200 yards with a flat shooting rifle cartridge, and a 270 as you mentioned, is exactly that.
Also, as a novice, don't overthink things. Get a decent SFP scope and hunt/shoot with it. I use a standard Duplex style reticle on my 308 bolt action because it's simple and gets the job done.
I think people get way too caught up in the SFP vs FFP debate. My wife's best friends' brother is a retired Army Ranger sniper with 7 deployments and I was lucky to have a lengthy conversation with him about shooting. He mentioned without a doubt that he preferred a good SFP scope and trash talked all the internet FFP fanboys. With a good SFP scope, your reticle will still subtend at lower magnifications with some basic math.
And most BDC type reticles on an FFP scope are too fine and small at lowest magnification anyway...
Show me a novice with a fancy FFP scope and I'll show you someone who doesn't know a darn thing about the reticle they're using. Unless you plan to chrono your loads and ultimately test them out to range, the hash marks in your reticle mean virtually nothing to begin with.
Also, "what is easiest for zero and aiming" has nothing to do with SFP vs FFP... zero, zilch. Aiming is your ability to hold your aiming point on your intended target, zeroing is your ability to adjust your aiming point to where the bullet is flying.
I am glad to see you asking these questions, but it's very apparent you have a great deal to learn before jumping into the technical advantages/disadvantages of SFP vs FFP.
Your first step is going to be in mastering your ability to quickly zero your rifles, whether it be a red dot or scope.
With typical hunting ranges, especially out here, you simply will not need to utilize most BDC reticles, you will be "point blank range" within about 200 yards with a flat shooting rifle cartridge, and a 270 as you mentioned, is exactly that.
Also, as a novice, don't overthink things. Get a decent SFP scope and hunt/shoot with it. I use a standard Duplex style reticle on my 308 bolt action because it's simple and gets the job done.
I think people get way too caught up in the SFP vs FFP debate. My wife's best friends' brother is a retired Army Ranger sniper with 7 deployments and I was lucky to have a lengthy conversation with him about shooting. He mentioned without a doubt that he preferred a good SFP scope and trash talked all the internet FFP fanboys. With a good SFP scope, your reticle will still subtend at lower magnifications with some basic math.
And most BDC type reticles on an FFP scope are too fine and small at lowest magnification anyway...
Show me a novice with a fancy FFP scope and I'll show you someone who doesn't know a darn thing about the reticle they're using. Unless you plan to chrono your loads and ultimately test them out to range, the hash marks in your reticle mean virtually nothing to begin with.
Also, "what is easiest for zero and aiming" has nothing to do with SFP vs FFP... zero, zilch. Aiming is your ability to hold your aiming point on your intended target, zeroing is your ability to adjust your aiming point to where the bullet is flying.
I am glad to see you asking these questions, but it's very apparent you have a great deal to learn before jumping into the technical advantages/disadvantages of SFP vs FFP.
Your first step is going to be in mastering your ability to quickly zero your rifles, whether it be a red dot or scope.
alucard0822
For great Justice
definitely. The main issue with FFP is the reticle tends to be really thin on low magnification, where you are probably shooting close, and it's thick at longer ranges/high magnification. Where a FFP 1MOA thick crosshair is barely visible at 100 yards, it might cover the entire target at 1K, a SFP will take up less of the target as magnification increases. Of course the benefit is ranging/holdovers when using it between settings especially if it has a large magnification range. If it's relatively low powered, a daylight bright dot can help make aiming easier when close. A SFP has a better reticle for most every purpose other than holdovers/ranging. IMO you are far better off with a decent zero that will hit + or - a couple inches out to a useable distance then using max magnification and the correct holdover marks if you go past that.
If it's a 1-4x or 1-6x LPVO or a scope I will be EXCLUSIVELY dialing with, SFP is somewhat acceptable. Otherwise, FFP all the way.
I know some people like having their "full size" reticle at minimum magnification, and thus prefer SFP. The less charitable way of looking at that is that with an SFP reticle at minimum magnification, you actually cannot aim as precisely as you could with an FFP reticle.
I know some people like having their "full size" reticle at minimum magnification, and thus prefer SFP. The less charitable way of looking at that is that with an SFP reticle at minimum magnification, you actually cannot aim as precisely as you could with an FFP reticle.
I go back and forth on FFP and SFP. I like the fineness of the reticle in SFP scopes for precise shooting, sometimes FFP scopes the reticle becomes too large at higer magnifications and can obscure the target. You also lose a large portion of your reticle when at max magnification. Some scopes only give you about 5MOA/MIL at max magnification. Most high end FFP scopes will account for this with reticle design. The biggest advantage for me with a FFP scope is if you are doing any kind of competition and have to transition between targets at different distances. When you're being timed not have to mess with the turrets and being able to use the reticle for hold overs is an advantage. For longer range shooting when I have time I prefer a SFP and using the turrets. It really depends on what you want to do with the scope. I'd say my scopes are split 50/50 SFP/FFP.
If your FFP scope is only giving you 5 MOA of usable holdover at max, you bought a terrible scope. On that note, worth noting is that a bad SFP scope is gonna perform better than an equally bad FFP scope, which I suspect is where a lot of people are forming their opinions from.
The vortex Viper PST line is pretty good in the reticle magnification regards. I find the reticle kind of unusable at 5X though. At 25X the reticle looks like a SFP reticle does at every power. The Primary arms FFP scopes reticles get a little too big at max mag. I suggest buying something to get an idea of what you like. If you buy through Amazon you can check it out and then return it.
Not a scope expert but inrangetv just posted a visual comparison of two scopes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7XJVyVZ5sk
wb3jma
Active Member
That was a very good example thank you.
454shooter
LARGE Caliber
I tried a couple different FFP scopes and really wanted to like them. Love the idea that the reticle is "calibrated" across the magnification range. My problem is, with aging eyes, that reticle can become virtually useless at low power settings. SFP just works better for me for that reason. Probably not a young guy issue.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Awareness/Mindset/Q&A get together with Bob "Ninja" Porras. Delta/CIA guy. Thursday April 18,2024 (6 Viewers)- Latest: holesonpaper
-
-
-
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
Hair-trigger posting... please include more than just the "headline" (2 Viewers)- Started by Mr H
- Replies: 11
-
-
-
(Duplicate - mods please close) MoCo trans student arrested for threatening school (1 Viewer)- Started by Lafayette
- Replies: 2