New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - FFP vs SFP
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

FFP vs SFP

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/20/2011 at 17:56
matt_3479 View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper
Avatar

Joined: January/20/2011
Location: Ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 7
i was wondering what everyones thoughts were on FFP vs SFP scopes for hunting? for long range hunting?  and for long range target shooting?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/22/2011 at 22:55
outlawskinnyd View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice


Joined: November/28/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 129
i love them.

on lower mags its not that big of a deal. but once your start getting into higher mags like 12x i think they are worth the extra money.

thats just me though
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/23/2011 at 08:01
rightwingnut View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: August/30/2010
Location: MI
Status: Offline
Points: 26
Outlaw- are you serious? Your answer to his question is "I love em". You love what and why? This board is for discussion of optics and providing facts and opinions on scopes. "I love em" may be a fact or your opinion but how does that help answer the original posters question? Sorry for the rant guy!
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/23/2011 at 08:49
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 12745
Welcome to OT, Matt!

The FFP vs. SFP topic has been discussed at length here.  Do a search, and you will find plenty of pro and con discussions of both.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/23/2011 at 14:16
tahqua View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Have You Driven A Ford Lately?

Joined: March/27/2006
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 7563
Regarding hunting, I like FFP for big game. The reticle increases in size proportionately with magnification. It is easy to see when hunting in low light. This feature would probably be undesirable for precision shooting at long range.
On the other hand, you can mil at any power because of this. Others here can better answer that aspect.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 00:08
8shots View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar
'lord of the flies'

Joined: March/14/2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 5472
I found the FFP reticule to small on low power settings, which is where it would mostly be on a hunting rig.
I think FFP should mainly be used in tactical field for judging distances.
 
My experience on a target rig and engaging small targets I found that the FFP reticule intersections just to small to be of practical use.
 
On targets of 1 yd in size (man deer car etc) I think the FFP would function better as it is more readable.
 
Try milling 0.5 mill at 400yds on a FFP set on 15X!!!!


Edited by 8shots - January/24/2011 at 00:08
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 03:46
Jon A View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: March/14/2008
Location: Everett, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 656
Your experience is less than helpful without telling us which one you are talking about.  Some companies do a poor job of designing reticles.  It's like saying you met a woman and she was ugly, so you don't like women now.  Some work better than others.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 04:13
8shots View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar
'lord of the flies'

Joined: March/14/2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 5472
Originally posted by Jon A Jon A wrote:

Your experience is less than helpful without telling us which one you are talking about.  Some companies do a poor job of designing reticles.  It's like saying you met a woman and she was ugly, so you don't like women now.  Some work better than others.
 
I thought the question was about FFA vs 2ndFocal, so I addressed that question.
 
I was also replying to a question asked by matt3479. If he would like more info I would be happy to respond to his questions.
 
And if some work better then others, then you are clearly not in charge.


Edited by 8shots - January/24/2011 at 04:23
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 06:27
Jon A View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: March/14/2008
Location: Everett, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 656
You said "the" FFP reticle is too small at low powers.  Some FFP reticles are indeed too small at low powers.  Some FFP reticles are GIANT at low powers.  Without specifying what reticle it was you used your input is meaningless.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 06:42
8shots View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar
'lord of the flies'

Joined: March/14/2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 5472
Originally posted by Jon A Jon A wrote:

You said "the" FFP reticle is too small at low powers.  Some FFP reticles are indeed too small at low powers.  Some FFP reticles are GIANT at low powers.  Without specifying what reticle it was you used your input is meaningless.
 
Please explain this.... if 1mil covers 10cm at 100m how can the reticule be giant at low powers.
 
At low power the 10cm at 300m wil be tiny indeed, and the reticule equally tiny. If the reticule was gaint sized (that is not graduated), then 1" mil" would cover more then 10cm, or do I have it wrong?
 
To have a FFP reticule without graduations on it, in otherwords only a GIANT reticule, would be meaningless in my humble opinion.


Edited by 8shots - January/24/2011 at 06:44
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 08:42
FireEMT5 View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: September/07/2010
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Status: Offline
Points: 266
I only have the SS 3x9 which has FFP.  I have other scopes with SFP which reside on a couple of my .22 LR guns.
 
Now many will say or have said that FFP on a low power scope like the SS 3x9 isn't necessary or isn't as useful compared to a higher power scope.  To each there own, if you don't like it, don't buy it.  I however do like FFP and any scope I buy from here on out for anything larger than a .22 will have it.  That's just my personal opinion - it works for me.  The reason for it is, is that it just clicked the first time I used it.  I happen to like the way the center mils get smaller on lower magnification - more the less like a traditional cross hairs.  At higher powers where you or at least I would be more likely to range or check a target the mils grow and therefore are useful.  To me it just works at both ends of the range.
 
Alot of the new stuff today with FFP have improved mil reticles using hash marks instead of mil dots.
 
If you want to hunt and target shoot long range and don't want to dial in all the time, this would seem like a no brainer, at least to me.  I'd go FFP.
 
If you can, borrow one or shoot someone's gun with a FFP scope and see if it agrees with you.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 08:43
Ernie Bishop View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: January/26/2010
Location: Gillette, WY
Status: Offline
Points: 564
I have used Holland's ART Reticle  in NF (3.5-15), Leupold (6.5-20), and (S&B 5-25) and Vortex's HD Razor 5-20 (Their MOA Reticle).
All of these are FFP, and I really like FFP for LR hunting, reticle ranging, and field shooting and tactical matches.
For BR shooting & prairie dog shooting I prefer SFP.
At lowest magnification can I really use the MOA reticle? 
No, but I don't need to since I will be using the  main crosshair for any shooting at close ranges.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 09:47
Dale Clifford View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight


Joined: July/04/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5087
It's like saying you met a woman and she was ugly, so you don't like women now. 
 
 
 
 
Party harder, go ugly sooner, don't wait to choose whats left.
 
 


Edited by Dale Clifford - January/24/2011 at 09:48
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 10:10
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 12745
Originally posted by Ernie Bishop Ernie Bishop wrote:

II really like FFP for LR hunting, reticle ranging, and field shooting and tactical matches.
For BR shooting & prairie dog shooting I prefer SFP.
At lowest magnification can I really use the MOA reticle? 
No, but I don't need to since I will be using the  main crosshair for any shooting at close ranges.
 
My thoughts exactly.  However, I also like FFP for general big game hunting as well when the FFP reticle is combined with illumination.  In that way, illumination solves the issue of the reticle getting borderline too fine at low magnification, and having the ability to make the reticle stand out bolder as you turn up magnification is handy in low light.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 10:42
jonoMT View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: November/13/2008
Location: Montana
Status: Offline
Points: 4244
Some FFP reticles have thicker lines so they're easier to see @ low mag. However, some people - typically some varmint shooters - don't like that the thicker lines cover the target @ high mag. The ones I've used - the Premier Gen II mil dot and the SS 3-9X - had reticles that have line thicknesses that work well from 5X on up within the thinner gradated section. At lower mag the way thicker outer posts are visible and act much like a typical duplex reticle. And that reflects a reality that most people who know what they're doing have no need to range on low mag. If you've actually tried ranging with a reticle you know that 1) you need some decent magnification - especially the farther out you get where getting range right is far more critical - and 2) as steady a hold as possible.

In short, well-designed FFP reticles work great for hunting and tactical rifles. With matching turrets, you can obtain a zero faster, range without worry that you're precisely on some ranging power, and since the subtensions are always proportional to the target size regardless of magnification you can lead or correct a shot using the reticle.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 14:05
8shots View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar
'lord of the flies'

Joined: March/14/2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 5472
I agree with all the comments made, especially with Dale Clifford. A man of great wisdom.
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 14:36
Jon A View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: March/14/2008
Location: Everett, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 656
Originally posted by 8shots 8shots wrote:

Please explain this.... if 1mil covers 10cm at 100m how can the reticule be giant at low powers.
 
At low power the 10cm at 300m wil be tiny indeed, and the reticule equally tiny. If the reticule was gaint sized (that is not graduated), then 1" mil" would cover more then 10cm, or do I have it wrong?
 
To have a FFP reticule without graduations on it, in otherwords only a GIANT reticule, would be meaningless in my humble opinion.

Because you can make them as big as you want.   Many of the old-school Euro scopes in FFP have #4, #1, etc, reticles where the posts are many mils thick and the center lines are very thick as well. 

The new SS 1-4 has posts several mils thick that look "big" on 4X (the low end on many scopes).  It also has graduations on it for holdover or ranging as well as can possibly be done at 4X. 

An example in the world of high powered tactical scopes, the #1 complaint about the IOR FFP is that it is too darn thick!  It is too big!  Most think it's pretty good but those who don't like it don't like it because they think it's too big, nobody thinks it's too small.

Why don't you just answer the question--which did you use?  I've got a library of them in my head and would be able to tell you if it was thick or thin, good or bad.  That would at least give your comments some context.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 14:44
8shots View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar
'lord of the flies'

Joined: March/14/2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 5472
Jon A, my comment was made for a specific application, ranging small targets at distances over 300yds.
 
The reticule was the Leupold TMR.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/24/2011 at 17:20
Jon A View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: March/14/2008
Location: Everett, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 656
OK, thanks.  That helps.  Now I've found your old thread which I'm sorry I didn't see before or maybe I could have been of more help.

The TMR is a very thin reticle, one of the thinner FFP reticles you will find.  IMHO it is too thin for the lower magnification scopes--especially since they are not illuminated.  However, for an 8.5-25X it's about right in my opinion and in daylight illumination is a non-issue.  Those scopes tend to be used on 8.5X very little.  Everybody knows I'm not a huge fan of Leupold scopes these days, but in this case I must say there's nothing wrong with that reticle (it's in fact very nice) in that scope.  Your problem appears to be misunderstanding of its intended use.

There is no reason in the world you should need to see the .2 Mil marks at 8.5X.  That is not what they are there for.  For ranging things you want to use the highest power possible for the best accuracy.  In the match you describe 25X might be too much which is where the advantage of FFP comes in--you can turn the power down some and still range with the reticle, use it for holds, etc where with a SFP you'd be stuck shooting the entire match on 25X or doing extra math in your head.

You shouldn't turn it all the way down to minimum power and expect to accurately range, however.  The .2 mil marks are not intended to be used at all on low power.  Some of the newer/fancier (S&B MSR for example) reticles actually have those little marks made from thinner lines so they completely disappear at low power--because they know anytime you need to use them you should turn up the scope anyway.  And at high power you don't want them thick.

I'm not sure how you think a SFP scope would be better in that situation.  Sure, the .2 Mil marks would be bigger and easier to see on 8.5X--but they would no longer be .2 Mil marks!  They instead would be roughly .6 Mil marks so you'd have even more problems trying to range accurately.  You would be no more accurate than using the .5 Mil marks on any other reticle.  The problem with ranging is not the reticle getting small--but the targets getting small at 8.5X.  If the reticle is the "correct" size it'll be small, just like the targets.

If you need to do your shooting at low power the targets are fairly close and decently sized so you don't likely need the accuracy of ranging with the .2 Mil marks.  Quickly range using the .5 Mil marks.  If you need to be more accurate, if the targets are smaller/farther, turn up the scope. 

If you need to always run it on 8.5X, as I said before the TMR is fairly thin at that power and there are dozens of FFP scopes with reticles that are thicker and would be faster and easier to use at that power level.  With the IOR I mentioned above, you can pretty easily see the 1/2 Mil marks down to 3X (of course it would be stupid to try and range something on 3X, but you could) and the .25 Mil marks are very fast and easy to see at 9X.  That's just one example.

Anyway, that's why I wanted to know which reticle you had, because they are not all the same just because they're FFP.  Many are more than twice as thick as the TMR which it sounds like you may like better.  And seeing your problem described in detail in the other thread leads me to conclude most of your problem isn't the reticle's fault at all, but a misunderstanding of the nature of ranging things at low power.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/25/2011 at 00:44
8shots View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar
'lord of the flies'

Joined: March/14/2007
Location: South Africa
Status: Offline
Points: 5472

Jon, thank you for the lenghty explanation. I see my specific problem slightly differently and that it is the small size of the targets we have to range - and 8inch or 200mm target. At 100m it covers only 2mils, at 200m 1mil and 350 m only 0.57mils.

Now throw in a bit of mirage and you may have to crank down to 16X or so and things start getting tricky to read the graduations on a FFP.Hence my earlier comment that I found a FFP for my use (ranging small targets at a distance) not so great.( Even at 25X reading 0.57mils in a timed event is not easy.)
 
On a SFP I can use a "reverse thinking cheat sheet", crank the power up or down untill it fits into a specific graduation and then read the power setting against a cheat sheet. 
 
 
 
However, you and all the others on this thread have highlighted the different reticules available for FFP and the types of use for a FFP. The most usefull point being use the FFP reticule and its graduations  on a high zoom for further targets and a low zoom with no graduations for closer targets.
 


Edited by 8shots - January/25/2011 at 00:50
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/26/2011 at 11:18
fairchase View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: January/22/2011
Status: Offline
Points: 36
 Does someone know which one is more expensive to produce ?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/26/2011 at 11:31
SVT_Tactical View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar
Chief Sackscratch

Joined: December/17/2009
Location: NorthCackalacky
Status: Offline
Points: 27774
Given the prices of them I'd place a fair bit of assumption on FFP
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/26/2011 at 11:47
Ernie Bishop View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: January/26/2010
Location: Gillette, WY
Status: Offline
Points: 564
Originally posted by fairchase fairchase wrote:

 Does someone know which one is more expensive to produce ?


FFP
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/26/2011 at 12:04
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 12745
I don't know that either is more expensive to produce than the other, as each have their own issues. 
 
A FFP reticle needs to be smaller due to its location in the optic, theoretically making the reticle itself more difficult to produce.
According to S&B, it's more difficult to make a SFP scope not shift POI during power change.  In a FFP scope, the target image and the reticle are on the same focal plane and are magnified simultaneously.  So, even if the center of the reticle isn't exactly on the centerline of the image, it doesn't really matter as long as it doesn't move.  In a SFP reticle, it does matter if it's not perfectly centered in the target image because as you increase magnification, the amount of deviation error increases proportionally, causing a POI shift.  Also, a SFP reticle element is located inside the zoom tube and can therefore move slightly when the power ring is rotated if the design isn't sound and mating parts are not held to very tight tolerances.
 
I don't know how much or even if those considerations have an influence on manufacturing costs, though. 


Edited by RifleDude - January/26/2011 at 12:08
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: January/26/2011 at 14:37
Jon A View Drop Down
Optics Journeyman
Optics Journeyman
Avatar

Joined: March/14/2008
Location: Everett, WA
Status: Offline
Points: 656
Originally posted by 8shots 8shots wrote:

On a SFP I can use a "reverse thinking cheat sheet", crank the power up or down untill it fits into a specific graduation and then read the power setting against a cheat sheet.

I see.  That can be a very fast and handy way to range things.  Much like the Leupold 16" duplex numbers they'd put on the power dial on Vari-X III's for quickly ranging deer.  That can work very well and I can see how you'd like to stick to that method when you know the size of the targets beforehand and especially if they're all the same size.

If they didn't tell you how big the targets were until it was time to shoot, and/or the targets were different sizes, I think you'd find ranging the conventional way your best option.


Edited by Jon A - January/26/2011 at 14:38
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "FFP vs SFP"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
matching turrets to reticle and FFP vs SFP ccoker Tactical Scopes 0
Glass between Mark 4 FFP and SFP ccoker Tactical Scopes 1
IOR FFP or SFP scopes? m1a convert Tactical Scopes 5 7/30/2007 10:49:16 AM
Need help with FFP, SFP 82abnnotasniper Tactical Scopes 27 4/18/2006 1:52:48 AM
FFP or SFP which one? Jeff7mag Rifle Scopes 12
PRAIRIE DOGS; FFP OR SFP? cruft Varmint Scopes 12
Leupold MK4 4.5-14X40 SFP Mil-Dot $750 jjrgr21 Optics For Sale 0
Viper PST 6-24x50 SFP Tracking Help NC_Army_Guy Rifle Scopes 4
viper pst 4-16 x 50 sfp fairchase Rifle Scopes 2
New SWFA SS 3-9x42 FFP and 10x42 HD Chris Farris Tactical Scopes 178


This page was generated in 0.250 seconds.