Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: first or second focal plain?

  1. #1

    first or second focal plain?

    Hi
    looking at scopes and to see if any one uses scopes with the first focal plain, and the benefits. Or stick to second focal plain.
    ​Thanks

  2. #2
    I use as S&B. The only true advantage is your holdover remains the same throughout the zoom range so if you have mil dots you can use them to hold over at different known ranges without having to be at a particular zoom setting.

    ​Other than that good glass is good glass
    Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not using it in a fruit salad.

    Amateurs practice until they get it right. Professionals practice until they never get it wrong.

  3. #3
    If you use a mil dot reticule in the FFP range estimation is constant at all magnifications.

  4. #4
    I have three variable mag scopes.
    The stalky-type one has the so-called TDS Reticle for holdover at different ranges, which is the kind that usefully stays true regardless of mag setting. The down side it that at high mag, the reticle is fairly thick: but fortunately, so are hinds. The scope isn't on a rifle at the moment anyway.

    The foxy/vermin and the target scopes are the kind where the crosshair (plain in both cases) stays super-fine despite high mag. The fox one is illuminated so you can still see it in the dark.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by lyon View Post
    Hi
    looking at scopes and to see if any one uses scopes with the first focal plain, and the benefits. Or stick to second focal plain.
    ​Thanks
    FFP is necessary for range estimation accross the zoom range.. if you aren't going to range find with it, or as someone else mentioned, use the reticle scale to give accurate holdover values, then you will probably find it more of a hinderance than a benefit.. at full zoom you mey find the target obscured..

    If there is no ranging scale in on the reticle FFP is pointless

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Vipa View Post
    FFP is necessary for range estimation accross the zoom range.. if you aren't going to range find with it, or as someone else mentioned, use the reticle scale to give accurate holdover values, then you will probably find it more of a hinderance than a benefit.. at full zoom you mey find the target obscured..

    If there is no ranging scale in on the reticle FFP is pointless
    I have a FFP scope with a true mildot reticle and very fine central crosshairs.

    At high magnification it is a very useful precision reticle, and the mil dots and other gradations allow accurate holdover.

    At low magnification the central part of the reticle becomes almost invisible, but then wide outer posts come into view, like a german reticle, good for close range low light.

    Its a very useful characteristic, like two reticles in one.

    Something not often mentioned is that FFP is pretty much immune to zero shift with magnification, and more tolerant of parallax shift when improperly focussed at eyepiece or objective, due to the way the optics work.

    2nd FP scopes have to be precisely made to avoid small (or large) zero shifts as mag. is altered. These can be very obvious if you look at a collimator reticle. I've seen (and rejected) some quite expensive 'scopes due to this problem, which only gets worse as the scope mechanism wears.

    Many will never notice, because they always zero at full mag, and the wandering zero usually returns to the same place at max (or min) magnification.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Vipa View Post
    If there is no ranging scale in on the reticle FFP is pointless
    Agreed, but people often overlook the little known dimensions of the bars and spaces on a 4 or 4a reticule
    not a commonly used "range finding reticule" like a mildot but the width of the bars and the space between cross hair and bar edge are significant
    more often than not the width of the bars are 1/2 the space between the cross hair and the end of the bar
    add that to the half width of bar dissected by the cross hair and you have a "mildot-esque" range finder

    I have a 4a FFP S&B (whilst I personally never range find with it!)



  8. #8
    I prefer second focal plane. Simply because the cross hair doesnt block out as much of the target.
    This probably wont matter on large quarry such as deer - But on small vermin - At high mag it does.


    Personally, I wouldn't use the reticule for Gestimating the range - I would either use a range finder , and know precisely what range I am shooting. Or use my senses and experience to estimate the range.

    FFP does have its uses - but not for me.

    regards
    Alan
    Last edited by sir-slots-alot; 10-10-2013 at 10:51.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by sir-slots-alot View Post
    I prefer second focal plane. Simply because the cross hair doesnt block out as much of the target.
    This probably wont matter on large quarry such as deer - But on small vermin - At high mag it does.


    Personally, I wouldn't use the reticule for Gestimating the range - I would either use a range finder , and know precisely what range I am shooting. Or use my senses and experience to estimate the range.
    +1

Similar Threads

  1. Plain case for a short rifle
    By Pine Marten in forum Equipment & Accessories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 20-09-2012, 17:11
  2. cammo or plain
    By dev237 in forum Equipment & Accessories
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 24-05-2012, 11:13
  3. Cammo test - plain green, plain brown and tweed print
    By caorach in forum Equipment & Accessories
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 24-05-2012, 11:12
  4. Stalking jacket - plain or camo?
    By andyf in forum Equipment & Accessories
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 02-03-2012, 20:49
  5. Camo versus plain green
    By Hales Smut in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 27-05-2011, 12:44

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •