FFP vs SFP

[TDC]

Nothing wrong , they don't cover big target, but small one at high magnification, can be really a pain to see.

Yes wrong. You need to read more and post less. Your understanding of FFP optics is wrong and you're spouting ignorant garbage as "fact". I will explain it again. A FFP optic allows the reticle to remain THE SAME SIZE in relation to the target/field of view THROUGHOUT THE RANGE OF MAGNIFICATION. The reticle does not "grow" to cover anymore of the target than it did at any other lower magnification setting.

TDC

 

[marcoman]

Are you a parrot ?

Now , it' s time to say why ?

He doesn't know why.

 

[caramel]

Are you a parrot ?

Now , it' s time to say why ?

They just feel better, out of the half dozen of S&B i own, 5 are FFP, guess wich one i use the less... JP.

 

[Bile]

it seems to me that optics are essential for precision application of firearms. thus the importance of good optics cant be overstated. sfp are a cheap shortcut option which add in more factors that a shooter doesnt need to subject himself to. bottom line for me is if i want a variable power to make use of that function properly it has to be ffp with a correct reticule. ie dial down mag due to mirrage. since im paying for it from my pocket i dont want to waste money on junk. imo manufacturers should focus on ffps or fixed power instead of these shortcut optics. or just use iron sights.

 

[BreakFreeCLP]

V:i:

 

[Tomochan]

it seems to me that optics are essential for precision application of firearms. thus the importance of good optics cant be overstated. sfp are a cheap shortcut option which add in more factors that a shooter doesnt need to subject himself to. bottom line for me is if i want a variable power to make use of that function properly it has to be ffp with a correct reticule. ie dial down mag due to mirrage. since im paying for it from my pocket i dont want to waste money on junk. imo manufacturers should focus on ffps or fixed power instead of these shortcut optics. or just use iron sights.

I expect it will come as a surprise to many to learn that according to you both of my S+B Pmii 12-50x56 and my three NF scopes are junk. I further expect that SFP scopes are used by many - a goodly number who will have a great deal of shooting experience - who, like me, strongly disagree with your comment.

 

[Gobc]

I fail to see the whole point to FFP. As stated before, if your milling, your going to do it with max magnification to get a more accurate reading. In general, if your long range shooting, your going to be using max magnification. There might be times in high mirage that one might back off the magnification, but initial milling will still be done at max magnification. The only reason I see to have FFP is if your going to be shooting at close range and long range. And at close range you don't need to mill your target since a 100y zero will probably suffice. I honestly think FFP is a bit of a gimmick. But hey, if you like, and your willing to pay for it, more power to you.

Oh and to the people who say "the math is easier", I bet you were the people in math class who said "when are we ever going to need this sh!t in real life"

 

[ultimate_monkey]

i can see you dont get the whole point of FFP, no i (we) wont always be milling on max power.. no i dont shoot long range on max power, frankly i hardly ever go above 16x for my type of shooting. and yes i push out further then the average weekend plinker when i get the chances. once again, no milling wont always be done at max...

i shoot all my wind calls with hold left/right, i use the h59 reticle, so i shoot almost every thing with hold over which on e SFP scope will only work at a certain magnification..


honestly this isnt ment to be insulting, but you probably dont see the point as you dont know how to properly use it for what its meant for... varying ranges, holding wind calls, hold overs, moving targets... its not meant for a set up and shoot paper at a static distance all day type of shooting...

 

[Gobc]

No insult taken. In fact thanks for explaining it to me. Furthermore what you illustrated is how different my shooting, and type of shooting is from yours. I shoot at max magnification when ever possible. I also rely on my scope adjustments for than my reticle. Using hold over for wind call seems like a good ideas as wind speeds can fluctuate quite frequently.

For the original poster, I think you should evaluate what type of shooting your doing. If your doing things like Ultimate_monkey is, the FFP might be useful. But if your doing more static precision paper punching, maybe you can save some cash by sticking with a SFP. Also consider your shooting preference. Are you going to rely more on the reticle, or are you find counting clicks?

 

[hawk-i]

I prefer SFP, I always know my range to target (have ranging binos)on shots at further ranges and I adjust for the distance using the turret so for me I don't see a need to pay extra for FFP...for hunting IMHO I believe ranging distant targets shouldn't be subjected to the possibility of error using math and hash marks.
Can you accurately range an animal at 675 yards using a FFP optic, I cant....but I can with my binocs which takes one of the variables out of the equation.
Nothing wrong with FFP but IMO I personally don't see the need for it, but that's just me

 

[xdmer]

FFP is my preference - I have FFP on my AR's and SFP on my hunting rifles, and if cost were not an issue I would have FFP there too.

 

[stubblejumper]

Cost isn't an issue for me, but every scope that I own, is SFP.

 

[kombayotch]

It never ceases to amaze me the number of people bashing FFP who clearly have no idea how either type of scope works. Its comical that they've looked through the scope, played with the magnification, seen the reticle "changing sizes", but have somehow missed that the target is also "changing sizes" by the same proportion.

When you look at reticle specifications from the manufacturers; for the SFP scopes it tells you that the specification is only good for a one magnification, while the FFP specification tells you its good for the entire magnification range (the Vortex PST line is a good example). This applies to the thickness as well as the milling features. Its really quite logical if you think about it: If you cut your magnification in half; when you look through the scope your target should be half the size. If your reticle hasn't changed size, that means it now covers twice the amount of target. If the reticles also appears half the size, its going to cover the same amount.

Line thickness appears twice as thick at 20x than it does at 10x. BUT, the target is also twice as big. Both the milling features AND the line thickness stay proportional to the target in FFP.

The reticle covers twice the area of the target at 10x than it does at 20x in the SFP. It has to if the reticle appears the same size, while the target appears to be half the size. You can think of it the other way around, but since the reticle is (often) spec'd at the highest magnification, it you have to calculate from that point to get the thickness at the lower magnification.

 

[jackdanyel]

no bashing, ffp is useless for most shooter. You can use a sfp at half power, easy with a mlr reticule.

do the sames example with a 5x and 25 x. The result will be a little different.

 

[ultimate_monkey]

no bashing, ffp is useless for most shooter.

do the sames example with a 5x and 25 x. The result will be a little different.

are you talking about doing them with the FFP?

if you are the result will be the exact same

in SFP, the 5x will cover even more of the target and at 25x with will cover less then at 20x

 

[kombayotch]

The FFP reticle will still stay proportional to the target because its on the same focal plane. The SFP reticle will cover 5x more of the target at 5x than it does at 25x.

 

[kombayotch]

Do you understand what "on the same focal plane" means? It means it's the same as if you drew the reticle on the target itself. You can change the magnification all you want, the reticle will always stay the same relative to the target.

 

[jackdanyel]

Do you understand what "on the same focal plane" means? It means it's the same as if you drew the reticle on the target itself. You can change the magnification all you want, the reticle will always stay the same relative to the target.

Yes , thanks, i know.

I just said, at low magnification ffp reticule is thin and it come large at high magnification.

with a sfp a thin reticule always stay thin and if needed, you can ranging at half magnification too, with a good reticule like the MLR.

 

[kombayotch]

Yes , thanks, i know.

I just said, at low magnification ffp reticule is thin and it come large at high magnification.

with a sfp a thin reticule always stay thin and if needed, you can ranging at half magnification too, with a good reticule like the MLR.

The MLR is 0.093 MOA thick at 22x (D), and gets thicker at lower magnification as you can see from the spec:

The Gen2 XR in my FFP Premier is 0.025 mil (0.086 MOA) thick (K) at every magnification:

My FFP reticle will never cover more or less of the target when I change magnification.

Sorry, but your SFP reticle is always thicker than my FFP reticle.

 

[caustic]

not sure why people get hung up on ranging with the reticule being the only reason for FFP, the best and in my opinion main reason for FFP is accurate hold overs and leads @ any magnification.