A question about FFP or SFP Scopes

[JonnieP]

Hi all,
My question goes out to all shooters with less than perfect eyesight.
When using a zoom scope, do you favour FFP or SFP optics? After quite a bit of looking and reading, I think I’m favouring FFP so that hold over, under mildot marking will remain valid at all magnifications. That said, I’d like your advice/opinions please.

Thanks in advance,


JP

[Neil54]

I have found with large magnification scopes, the reticule becomes useless once zoomed out.

I have a very good 4-12x40 that works well.
I also have a 4-16 that is OK but only just at low mag.

[Jesim1]

I have found with large magnification scopes, the reticule becomes useless once zoomed out.

I have a very good 4-12x40 that works well.
I also have a 4-16 that is OK but only just at low mag.

I agree with Neil, you will get people liking both types, but if your using a higher mag like a 6-24 for targets/range work, then the reticule at the lower end is useless for it's intent, as at air gun ranges the spacings are so small your can't use them. For that reason I prefer SSP for air guns and anything higher mag, lower mag and for hundreds of yards then they can be a benefit, as you describe, but try to look though one to see what I mean - seeing is believing

[angrybear]

I use both SFP & FFP,
my issue with SFP is that at lower mag, on the cheaper end scopes, the ret is so thick it obscures a large chunk of the target, I particularly dislike the basic Hawke 30/30, mil dot & 1/2 mil dot for this reason,
mind you Bushnell mil dot & most N-S rets are even worse to my eyes.

If you go up to their floating 10x 1/2 mil dot, AMX or the specialist ret's then you do get a nice fine clear usable ret for SFP from Hawke.

My best scopes are my Optisan EVX 4-16x44 FFP's, I love the FFP ret, the subtent's are perfectly clear, even down at 4x and as you say 1 mil is 1 mil across the whole mag range so if you know the range & projectile drop it's simple,
No working out how the mag relates to "true".

But as is said with all 'what scope' threads, everyones eyes are different, what suits one person may not suite another, so Never buy a scope without trying one.

[32:1]

SFP for me as the ret stays the same so its easy to see and use


Chris

[harvey_s]

If you do have a condition where on some days your vision alters - FFP does offer the real advantage to make the reticle bolder and easier to see.
But choose your reticle wisely - some try to be too clever and make themselves indistinct at low mags.
The good ones do not.

I'm a big fan of the BSA TMD reticle...

[angrybear]

SFP for me as the ret stays the same so its easy to see and use


Chris

FFP is far easier to use than SFP because the subtents remain in proportion to the target

You can shoot at any mag, zoom in until you find the POI, note the adjustment to POA in mils, zoom back out to any mag & the adjustment remains the same

In SFP you need to know what mag you shot, what mag you zoom out to, work out the relation between the two to convert the error, zoom back out to the exact same mag & hope your maths was correct.

Hardly easy

There's more to a good scope than just putting the centre cross on the target, and this is where FFP has the advantage.

[32:1]

I tend to shoot on x1.5 or x3 mag, ratting and pesting around the farms I need no more, I do shoot BR each Saturday morning and have left my scope at x30 and it never moves, but that is on a specific BR rifle.

Ive shot for years with fixed scopes and the main one was the venerable 4x40, I have tried a few ffp scopes only to find the rets to busy and cluttered, as Ive just grown up with learning and using holds and find it easy, I suppose I actually prefer fixed scopes.


Chris

[PCPShooter]

I tend to just set up a scope and leave alone so it doesn’t really matter

[32:1]

I tend to just set up a scope and leave alone so it doesn’t really matter

HFT style

[bill57]

I'm a big fan of the BSA TMD reticle...

Is that Deeley Plaza?

[bill57]

I'm with Neil and Jesim. When you try to use FFP at low mag, the reticle is far too fine (at least on the ones I've looked through). Possibly OK against a clear background, but if the background is at all "busy", the reticle is easily lost.

[angrybear]

Well hand on heart I cannot think of a single occasion where that has happened to me, but equally I'll only be using 4x around 20yds, 5x to maybe 25yds, at those ranges there's no issue.
by the time it gets to 6x the ret is so big it's impossible to lose it.

And of course simple common sense says, if you can't see the ret at min just turn the mag up until you can, it makes no odds to adjustment because 1 mil will still be 1 mil

[bill57]

I think there is a large element of personal preference involved anyway. Oddly enough, my most used scope is a variable Pecar, which is actually FFP - but it has a fairly pronounced German duplex reticle (no. 10) which is massive at 7x - but it works for me.

[32:1]

I'm with Neil and Jesim. When you try to use FFP at low mag, the reticle is far too fine (at least on the ones I've looked through). Possibly OK against a clear background, but if the background is at all "busy", the reticle is easily lost.

Agreed, Ive not found a suitable ffp ret yet.
Perhaps at shooting ranges and paper punching at bigger mags ffp work, but simply hunting or pesting a simple ret and fixed mag work well for me, the ability to be able to point and shoot quickly at various ranges is the key, I dont get time to twidle or focus. Each to their own I guess, be boring all the same



Chris