First Focal Plane or Second Focal Plane?

[EdanCo]

(Forgive me if this has been asked before, I couldn't find the topic)

Hi all,
I'm quite unfamiliar with the world of optics, being new. Currently, I haven't been on a stalk yet (Booked one in the new year), I'm researching into equipment and getting more familiarized with what I should look into.

Regarding optics, which do you prefer (FFP or SFP), and why?
All feedback is greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
Edan

 

[enfieldspares]

I guess it's what you grew up on. I started with fixed magnification 'scopes. So the reticule was one size.

Later when I tried a continental variable where the reticule grew in size as the magnification increased? I hated it!

For I increase magnification if I want greater control of placement of my shot.

So the very last thing I want is the reticule then so big it obscures much of what is below that what I'm immediately sighting in on.

To me it's as annoying as using a high power magnifying glass when fly tying.

Yes it makes the hook bigger. But it makes everything else bigger too.

So it becomes like dressing a fly the size of a small grappling hook with a one inch thick cable.

But some hunters like that the reticule grows.

As somehow you then use its thickness vis a vis the animal's leg to work out how far away it is.

 

[hendrix's rifle]

Depends on what I'm doing, I use both. Use a ffp on my 223 for varminting/longer range shooting. Make life easy calling corrections as the ret matches the turrets and the reticle when on full mag still allows headshots at a couple of hundred yards on rabbits and what not. The 308 wears a sfp that's ideal for what I use it for

 

[Rory]

I like using a mildot reticle. You can work out ranges of objects with a known size (eg average depth of adult Roe deer chest is 25cm, side on. So if I have a Roe deer side on and the chest measures 2.5 mildots I know it's 95-105m distant). In order for this to work accurately, the reticle needs to be in the FFP.
Equally, if you used a Duplex or other some such reticle with gaps, variable sized cross hairs etc you could use these to judge distance if you knew the sizes and their representation at a certain distance (eg at 100m the distance between the cross hair intersection and the thickening of the post on a duplex might be 20cm. You could then use this with something of a known size to make a considered estimate as to the range). You would not be able to do this with a second focal plane reticle, apart from at one magnification setting where you had previously recorded the distance. Sounds mega complicated, but it's easy once you get your head round it.
For that reason, I prefer FFP and never understand why people buy ranging reticles in a SFP scppe. If you get something like a P4L Fein reticle, it's really fine and you don't really notice it 'obscuring your target, which in my opinion is moot as the target and reticle increase in size when you increase the mag.
Definitely try and get hands on /eyes on on a range to see which you'll prefer.

 

[Rory]

A good explanation and demonstration

 

[enfieldspares]

But what many forget is with SFP if you make the effort to find what the width or vertical span covered by your duplex or similar reticule is on the lowest magnification at 100, 200 and 300 yards you can also work out range with it.

And then, knowing that distance, then increase the power to give you a precise aiming point "hold over".

Which as being SFP you can see under your aim point and know how much the aim is above your desired actual impact point.

Just as those of us that cut our teeth on fixed power scopes or iron sights used to do.

Thus to the OP the tip for correctly using a SFP 'scope is use the reticule as you would the front sight on an iron sighted rifle.

You use hold over. Which as just said is easier to do with precision as you can clearly see how much you are holding over.

Which is how shooters used to use the first fixed power scopes.