Hunting scope in first focal plane?

xingyc

Regular
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Location
GTA, Ontario
anyone using high power scope in first focal plane for hunting?
I'm considering to get a scope with 4~20 power for mid-range target shooting and close range hunting. first focal plane reticle is really convenient, but I see the possible drawback of ffp reticle under 100 yards. is ffp scope usable under 100 yards?
 
The reticle was the reason I went with a Burris Veracity.

When I bought it there was only a few choices my wallet could handle. The Veracity has at tapered main crosshair so it didn't go from looking like a 2X4 to a thread throught the zoom range.
 
thank you for your inputs.
I'm looking into the Bushnell DMR II, and Bushnell LRHS, LRTS.


I have the Bushnell 3-12x44 LRHS and it has fantastic glass, very clear and bright. The scope does have some weight to it but it is reasonable for FFP glass with a 44mm objective and 30mm tube it. I originally had it on my Weatherby 308 but decided to move it to my new Rem 700 7mm Rem Mag. I think it will match up great on that rifle and will make a nice long range hunting setup.
Bushnell definitely has some nice scopes available.
 
I am currently running the DMR II with the G3 reticle on my .243 and I absolutely love it, the only downside to it is the weight but I love the reticle and the glass is very clear. If I were to buy one specifically for hunting in FFP I would probably go with the 4.5-18x44 LRHSi save some weight and get an extremely good scope. I haven't had any issues using it under 100 yards.
 
I started using the LRHS and was pleasantly surprised by it. Decent glass, very nice reticle and fairly compact. A good value for the features you get. The only complaint I have is the zero stop system, could be a little more positive it's fairly easy to slip past zero if you're not careful.
 
No problem with FFP, but I'm sure it's detractors will jump in soon. Some don't like it for close in target shooting, each FFP scope based on reticle, will have a sweet spot for field of view, magnification and visibility. I personally really like them.
 
Seems like Bushnell has a good number of followers.
I read online, pass 18 power the DMR begin to lose light transmission, resolution, and colour fringing. Does the LRHS/LRTS suffer the same problem in high power?
Since the DMR has 34mm tube compare to 30mm on LRHS/LRTS, and 50mm objective lens compares to 44mm obj. lens. Does this mean the DMR are optically better?

I'm referring to the 4.5-18x44 LRHS/LRTS here.
 
Last edited:
I have a weaver tactical illuminated 3-15 on my 300WM

very good quality glass and enough power to have fun on clay birds up to 600 yards

if you want to hunt with a FFP reticule, I strongly suggest you pick one illuminated because at low power its extremely fine and may be hard to see in thick bush on a rainy day

then you want to have either locking or capped turrets so they dont hang on your jacket and f&%$ up your zero and miss your shot
 
THe LRHS is a fantastic scope for the money. I have one and a DMRii. I would suggest first considering what range you want to hunt at. My opinion is that FFP is far more useful and versatile than SFP. I think the only advantage of SFP is that you have a thicker, more distinct reticle at shorter ranges (read lower magnification). However, well designed reticles like the G2 and G3 solve this problem by having very thick posts on the outer edges of the reticle. Basically you put your target in the middle of the posts for a hasty shot and you won’t miss because you’re probably so close that it would be hard to miss. Hopefully that makes sense. The huge advantage with FFP is that you no longer have to use the old “aim 2 feet high at 300 yards” or whatever Kentucky windage people use when shooting at large game at over 200m/yrds. Know you’re dope, take the time to make a good shot and you probably won’t miss.
 
THe LRHS is a fantastic scope for the money. I have one and a DMRii. I would suggest first considering what range you want to hunt at. My opinion is that FFP is far more useful and versatile than SFP. I think the only advantage of SFP is that you have a thicker, more distinct reticle at shorter ranges (read lower magnification). However, well designed reticles like the G2 and G3 solve this problem by having very thick posts on the outer edges of the reticle. Basically you put your target in the middle of the posts for a hasty shot and you won’t miss because you’re probably so close that it would be hard to miss. Hopefully that makes sense. The huge advantage with FFP is that you no longer have to use the old “aim 2 feet high at 300 yards” or whatever Kentucky windage people use when shooting at large game at over 200m/yrds. Know you’re dope, take the time to make a good shot and you probably won’t miss.

thank you for pitch in.
Right now I'm comparing the LRTS and DMR II, in your opinion which scope has better resolution and light transmission in high magnification?
For the most time, I hunt 100-300 yards, but occasionlly, 100-50. I have target shoot with a 3-9 Leupold on 223 REM out to 450 yards. plan to shoot out to 1000 yards with 270WIN.
I don't expect the scopes to excel throughout the big gap (50-1000yards), but I hope they are above average at 200-700 yards.
 
Back
Top Bottom