I bought a SFP scope not really knowing what it meant; later on I watch a YT video of a guy bashing them and saying FFP is the way to go. I nearly cancelled my order until I saw your video. You broke it down fantastically for me and SFP seems perfect for my application. Thank you, you saved me time and money.
I pinned your comment to the top of the list. Thanks for sharing your story. It's not about one being better than the other; it's a question of what you're doing. I hope you like what you ordered!
I have listened to many videos with very capable people explaining the differences. My take is simple, a picture is worth a thousand words, buy a cheap ffp scope or vise-a-versa and use it for several different applications, such as shooting some targets, taking it out in the brush, and on the prairie to see the actual differences between the two. Then choose the type that fits your application. Good video and good explanations, thanks.
Both my scopes are sfp, I like them better for what I use them for which is just range target shooting. Awesome video and explanation of both, and love that you show video of both side by side to get a better idea.
Outstanding presentation! The visual examples and your thorough explanations were just what I needed to understand this topic. Thanks for all the work you put into this!
Very informative thank you. Personally I prefer FFP scopes. I started using them when I bought a scope on line but didn’t know it was FFP. I expected a SFP scope. I called the distributor and he talked me into to trying the FFP. I have never looked back. All my hunting rifle scopes are now FFP. However having said that I definitely prefer SFP for target shooting. I set the variable power to 6 x and it never changes.
Best description I have seen on FFP vs SFP, and I have seen and read quite a few. I understood the difference a long time ago, but you included some extra observations that were great considerations. Great video!
Very well done. Very informative for someone who is just now looking into subjects like these. I was able to gather great information that helped me make my decision on which way to go.
Ow man, thanks for the outstanding lesson! I'm from Brazil and trying to learn something about scopes at all and your video make things 110% more cleary to me! You've just got a new subscribe! I really appreciated that!
سلام دوست عزیز خسته نباشید من از ایران مزاحم میشم من خواستم دوربین المنت هلیکس بگیرم و لکان 2 دارم واسه شکار اف اف پی بگیرم یا اس اف پی ممنون از تجربه عزیز استاد
A problem I ran into this year deer hunting with a diamondback 6x24x50 FFP scope was I was going to take a shot really early morning and couldn’t see the reticle and it’s not illuminated. The reticle is so fine it’s unusable in low light.
The way I use an LPVO, or even an old 3x9. Is to have the rifle by default in the minimum magnification. This is the setting for snapshooting and for finding the target if I find a target and it's far away enough that I need zoom I hold it on target and smoothly zoom up to max essentially every time. Now that Max would be somewhere between 7 and 10 power. So any ranging I do is going to be on max zoom and that will always be accurate because I'm going to roll the lover until I fell it bottom out. this method has always been quick for me and something I can do smoothly while staying on target. That is provided that the zoom knob on the scope isn't so stiff that I torque the rifle out of position while adjusting. I have far less experience with a variety of scopes than you but I have generally had better luck actually keeping a target in my scope while zooming in on it with the second focal plane scopes versus the first. End up until recently per given level of quality there weren't even reasonable options within my budget for the first focal plane. I've used those mostly from friends who bought expensive names to impress people. And a lot of the first focal plane scopes I've used had very unforgiving eye boxes which in my opinion kind of negated their usefulness outside of extreme long range and benchtop target practice.
Smart process. It's impressive that you can roll focus and stay on target in a practical scenario. Can't say I've done that much. s Something to work on.
@@SocialRegressive well my experience was pretty weird. Is out getting into too much details consider it similar to prairie dog shooting from a boat. You had to have wide field of view to find the thing you were looking for stabilize on it and then a fair amount of zoom to get a clear shot. I would glass elements of a fishing net to estimate range since different elements of that had known distances. That and comparing the sudden the apparent size of the target to the duplex portion of the reticle. It was far from doing the advanced calculations like people do now for MRAD or MOA, It was if it's past this marker hold about here and if it's past that marker hold about there... I would say from observing a thing to shoot at to getting the shot off I would typically have between 5 and 10 seconds total having to drop some work thing and take the snapshot. So if I gave you the impression that first round hits were the expected norm then I would have misled you. It was get a shot that is close as quickly as possible and if you can snap off a couple of them then your odds improve.
@@SocialRegressive addendum it's worth noting that the pests I was shooting at would generally appear between about 30 ft and 300 yd. Most of them probably in the 150 to 200-yd range.
Really good explanation, I've watched several videos on this subject but struggled to understand until I watched this. Suddenly, they all make sense. Thanks.
Thanks, that was much more clearer than a foggy scope of my understanding. Your video is clear & true! Now I can know what my needs are for scope shopping!
After watching 5 other "simplified" (LOL) videos on this topic... Yours is the most in depth, precise, and CLEAR... the ONLY thing you didn't mention that could effect all of this, is Eye Relief... depending on what you are putting your scope on (I have a Swedish Mauser) the distance from your eye to the ocular lens may be too far in order for you to load with stripper clips or with proper shell ejection... if I wish to use stripper clips to load with, I'll need an eye relief of at least 11 to 13 inches depending on where I hold my cheek on the butt... if I single load each round, and use a cantilevered scope mount, I might be able to get away with 7 to 9 inches... either way it must be a budget scope under $150... doable?
It's going to be tough to find a scout scope in your price range, but I'll bet you can find one. Try Vortex or Leupold. Those will solve your problems as long you're ok with second focal plane.
@@SocialRegressive SFP would probably be the better choice as FFP at low magnification is really tiny and at 9-13inches might be impossible to even see clearly without spending more for illumination... I was just at my local gun shop and checked out a red dot... eye relief isn't an issue as long as you can see the dot... but no magnification, so if I was out deer hunting that might make it a bit more difficult in low light... I was also going to check out a Reflex sight... but thanks for your input
Great plain talk explanation for newbies, thanks for the time you spend on this video. I mostly hunt deer at medium (50 yards) to long range (400 yards). My eye sight is not so good now just turned 60 this month. I am using the Fix by Q LLC, in .308. I have two questions for you if you have the time to answer me. 1. I wear glasses now and wanted to know if I should use or not use my glasses when sighting in and hunting with the rifle? 2nd I was curious as to what scope you would recommend I use and why? Again thanks for your time and expertise. Last note anyone else that reads this feel free to comment on my 2 questions.
Great questions. I don't wear glasses, so I don't feel qualified to weigh in on the first question. My initial reaction is to ask which way will make you more adaptable in the field. If you are farsighted, you might prefer to shoot without glasses so your 'off' eye can see the environment and bullet impacts. Adjust the diopter for your dominant eye. Picking a best scope is tricky, too. Personally I would lean toward a flexible zoom range: maybe a 3-12x44mm like the Nitro or Thrive I've reviewed, or a 2.5-10x44mm like the Nitro or Engage. If your eyes can handle it, FFP is very quick and accurate in the field, but if not, SFP is more visible.
Your level of sharing your knowledge in your content is top tier, and I really appreciate it. That being said, do you think SFP is just as good for hunting groundhogs?
Great job explaining the difference between the two. I liked the point about how much time you have to acquire the target. Makes sense. Hold over on FFP reticle at let's say 200 yards will always be the same, no matter which magnification? But, hold over on SFP reticle will change, depending on magnification? I think it's how I understood it? Thanks, great video.
Excellent job man. I appreciate it. I'm trying to build an AR platform rifle and was trying to figure out what type of scope to put on it your vid helped me out.
Get an ACOG TA-31RCO- A4CP. It’s a fixed 4 power design with bullet drop compensation and ranging functionality. There is no better solution for any scenario and thus it’s why this optic is common to the USMC M16A4 Rifle. I am a Military Rifle Instructor assisting the USAMU deliver SDM Training and this concept being common to the SDMR Rifle too, I see Soldiers use it successfully within just a few minutes of familiarization. LPVOs are for the most part solving non-existent issues other than a novice shooter’s fantasies. What’s problematic with the LPVO is a distracting reticle that does not support an exacting understanding for where the rifle is pointed. One more thing, US Service Rifle Competitors prove the AR-15’s iron sights are sufficient even out to 1000 yards shooting at the long range target’s 44 inch bull, thus the 4 power ACOG is plenty of magnification to understand an E type target at any distance, as well as exactly where the rifle is pointed.
This was a great breakdown on the differences between the scopes. The graphic examples helped to seal the deal on the best option for my rifle. Very much appreciated and needed!
Great explanation! You always do a great job explaining whatever subject you focus on. I watched videos for weeks before deciding on a scope for my varmint rifle (17 WSM) most videos were yours. In the end, I got a scope that doesn't seem very polar amongst the social media types, but so far it has been a great scope for my purpose. It's a Mueller Eradicator 8.5-25X50. It has the finest reticle I've ever used, great optic for a value scope.
I bought FFP and for the type of hunting I do here in Indiana I would not recommend it. Target and long distances it is fantastic but in heavy woods it is not very useful. In low light conditions you can't see the reticle and subtensions! And when trying to track deer thru heavy thickets and woods it's basically useless.
Superb video. I think I’m going to ditch the rifle scope I have now to get a first focal plane type. Do you know of a good place online to sell slightly used rifle scopes like Rudolph brand?
Good job. I have been watching many videos this one had a bit of almost everything. i wonder with a second focal plain scope how much you would need all that info on the reticle? if you go to zero magnification my 1 to 6 PA raptor looks close to a red dot witch should be good for close ranged targets right?
I shoot FFP at steel or long-range. I have not hunted with a rifle in ten years (archery is how I hunt). That said, I plan on hunting Elk in October with a muzzleloader and am in the market for a good scope that may eventually end up on my 338 WIn Magnum. Everyone seems to say that the reticle becomes very small at low zoom (2.5-3.0) with FFP. I am looking closely at a Nightforce FX8 2.5-20 by 50 in both FFP and SFP. MY CONCERN IS NOT A LONG RANGE BUT CLOSE. CAN YOU ELABORATE ON WHAT YOU WOULD USE. VERY GOOD VIDEO BUT YOU DID NOT TALK MUCH ABOUT SHOTS AT CLOSE RANGE.
The small reticle at low magnification can be a problem, but most companies have found ways to make it work. A lower zoom ratio is good, like 4x. Illumination helps, too. But my favorite fix is when a reticle pairs fine measurements with a thick central circle or diamond. Check out the athlon helos 2-12x42mm Mil. The reticle works at all magnifications. You might like something like this one.
Some reticles have ranging feature when used with the power ring which also has distances marked on it. SFP Example Leupold Boone Crocket , turn power ring until known size target lines up with reticle, look at power ring the distance is marked on the power ring. Turn power ring to power using for your cartridge, then use the BDC reticle for the shot at the distance indicated. No extra .range finder or calc needed. 4.5-14x44 Now I'm wondering if they still make any like that
@@SocialRegressive I have really enjoyed mine for hunting, quick and easy to use. Checking I see it appears they still have the reticle available, but not the ranging feature marked on the power ring. With All the new rangefinders and ballistic calculators we have now not worth the extra cost I guess. There are some used on ebay and such.
I’m still a little confused FFP sounds better for me because my eye site is not that could anymore. I don’t plan on shooting deer past 400yrds but would like to shoot targets out to 500yrds
Great video, after focusing in on ALL those scopes on that bench my hope of targeting in on one scope is getting blurry, haha ,. Omg. My head is blowing up ,. Look... I just want one , I'm more confused now than when I started this study ,. FFP 1 to 6 magnification eazy to read reticle 50 to 200 yards . Wow so much to know and learn . Thank you Buddy for an outstanding video . Signed. Lost in space
🤣Check out the US Optics TS-6X. I've used it in a variety of scenarios, including deer hunting at the exact distances you mentioned. I think Primary Arms makes one that's similar.
@@SocialRegressive What I most appreciate about your presentations is that you provide several contexts so that the viewer can tell if the parameters you suggest are relevent to him or her. I would have avoided a lot of mistakes had I had access to this video earlier.
Have you jacked with the BDX optics any?? I accidentally got myself one in October and while I love the idea I haven’t even mounted it yet because the reticule is so off putting. I put a forge on that rifle and I’ll probably put the bdx on a deer rifle. It’s just an animal of a different kind and I haven’t committed to selling it nor using it yet
swampfox patriot 6-24×50 athlon argos btr gen2 6-24×50 blackhound genesis 6-24×50 primary arms slx with 6.5cm apollo reticle arken sh4 gen2 6-24x50 for a ruger american predator 6.5 creedmoor in magpul hunter stock? mainly hunting out to 400 yards and occasionaly steel out to 1k. which one would you go with?
Those magnifications should be fine for 1k yards as long as you have enough adjustment range. I suspect you'll be posted up somewhere stationary for hunting. If not, you might consider something lighter and with a wider view. As for those models, I think Cyclops Joe Rhea has tested most or all. You should check his reviews.
great video thank you, do you agree that either way you still need to be precise in knowing your distance to your target, it is okay for target shooting. Hunters want accurate shooting and need that accurate information quicker about their target distance. Will a laser fitted on the top of your scope inline set at cross-hairs at say 120 yards. As you move your distance from the target you laser beam will rise or fall accordingly from the center cross hair over and under 120 yards, the shooter just need to hold over the distance. Can you have a video showing this is it is correct or incorrect, i feel a lot of people would like to see this in action. or the types of lazers that would work for high power rifles at say 308.
That's an interesting idea, and yes, I think it would work, though it would be complicated to employ. You would need to mount the laser vertically offset from the scope, probably under the stock forend or considerably above the scope. Then you could create a chart that tracks the angular change at different distances, correlates it with your scope's reticle, then compares it to ballistic drop. The real challenges would be a lack of laser brightness as distances increase and an inability to detect minute changes as distances change. It might be easier and quicker (but more expensive) to run a rifle-mounted rangefinder.
Great content! One thing, magnification increase makes things look closer not larger. 2x does not make a six foot man look 12ft. It makes someone at 20 yards appear as if they were 10 yards. Subtle but important distinction. This is especially true for one like me with bad eyes. I wish they made the target look 2x as large.
Wait, hold-on, ffp is not at all needed since the shooter can use his computer like brain for both wind and bullet drop compensation on known dimension target so a sfp with a simple mil or MOA scaled reticle for ranging is all that’s needed for successful shooting in any scenario. The bottom-line is novice shooters do not have the basis for critical thinking on the matter to choose wisely. For them it would be best to learn basic marksmanship from a sfp scope in a 3.5 - 15 power range which has a reticle that can lead the eye to a consistent sight picture. At any rate, this video is good but could be better if it illustrated reticles and demonstrated ranging, wind, and bullet drop compensation functions.
Ok, ok...so you're saying to zero a sfp at a different zoom level other than maximum magnification? I mean I see more at 3 than 9(fov) if my reticle is "supposed" to work at max magnification only, that deer is only 75 yards out. I don't need to count the ticks on it. Can't I just zero a sfp at 4x at 75yrds?
I always zero at max magnification, and the zero distance will be based on the round and what I'm going to do with it. Mostly I'm zeroed at either 100 yards or 200 yards.
I can’t get anyone to help me,this year I want to harvest a deer at 400 to 500 yds away with a custom made 308.Which one do you feel would be best for this,FFP or SFP,ty
Given your intended distances, I would choose an ffp scope 100%. That way you can keep your eye in the scope and hands on the rifle. No need to convert values, too. When speed matters, FFP rules.
The groupthink moves around over time. This isn't about "best." It's about picking the right setup for what you're going to do. If you plan to shoot static targets, and you don't mind dialing, choose SFP. If your situation will get gnarly and fast, FFP is what I would take every time.
Most of the time, yes. As long as you know one size-measurement ratio you can get your measurement at any magnification. SFP in a high-magnification scope can be more precise, though.
It’s the exact same process, but one variable is removed (magnification). Any Second Focal Plane scope with a ranging reticle in Mils or Minutes will only be “true” at a specific magnification power (10X, often). On a First Focal Plane scope, magnification doesn’t matter. If your SFP scope is at the correct magnification, the method and means of ranging is identical to a FFP scope. But, if you are not at the correct magnification and forget to correct it, you will induce errors into your math that could cost you a hit.
@@G5Hohn rangefinders are ideal but not always available (or practical) depending on target size, distance, or movement. Knowing your Mil conversions and approximate target sizes usually works well enough for ranging at UKD precision rifle stages. You can memorize three or four gross ranging estimates in Mils for different target sizes (like 2/3 or 1/3 silhouettes) and get rough ranges really quickly.
For me its pretty easy. I dont like math, so i prefer ffp. Plus i can with some practice guestimate the range quite accurately with 0 math! so.. yeah. ffp for the win i say
I never knew the difference....you have taught this old dog a new trick. Oh and even if i win the lottery....i cant pay 2500 for a scope....it goes against my cheapness....and couldnt hide that from the wife.
![[UA] NAVI vs MOUZ | BO5 | IEM Rio 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CMBYk0cbGoA/mqdefault.jpg)
I bought a SFP scope not really knowing what it meant; later on I watch a YT video of a guy bashing them and saying FFP is the way to go. I nearly cancelled my order until I saw your video. You broke it down fantastically for me and SFP seems perfect for my application. Thank you, you saved me time and money.
I pinned your comment to the top of the list. Thanks for sharing your story. It's not about one being better than the other; it's a question of what you're doing. I hope you like what you ordered!
I agree!!
Thank you for bringing up the impact of zoom ratio on a FFP reticle.
I have listened to many videos with very capable people explaining the differences. My take is simple, a picture is worth a thousand words, buy a cheap ffp scope or vise-a-versa and use it for several different applications, such as shooting some targets, taking it out in the brush, and on the prairie to see the actual differences between the two. Then choose the type that fits your application. Good video and good explanations, thanks.
Both my scopes are sfp, I like them better for what I use them for which is just range target shooting. Awesome video and explanation of both, and love that you show video of both side by side to get a better idea.
Excellent explanation of First and Second Focal Plane and what the difference looks like!
Outstanding presentation! The visual examples and your thorough explanations were just what I needed to understand this topic. Thanks for all the work you put into this!
I'm glad you enjoyed the video! Thanks, man!
Very informative thank you. Personally I prefer FFP scopes. I started using them when I bought a scope on line but didn’t know it was FFP. I expected a SFP scope. I called the distributor and he talked me into to trying the FFP. I have never looked back. All my hunting rifle scopes are now FFP. However having said that I definitely prefer SFP for target shooting. I set the variable power to 6 x and it never changes.
That sounds really backwards. Most people prefer sfp for hunting and ffp for target hunting
That was awesome finally someone could explain FFP versus SFP. Thank you thank you thank you
Best description I have seen on FFP vs SFP, and I have seen and read quite a few. I understood the difference a long time ago, but you included some extra observations that were great considerations. Great video!
Thanks for letting me know you liked it, YellowJacket. Maybe someday I can get to my "pick the best cartridge" series.
Thanks for the information. Just got my first FFP scope. Setting up now. Been using scopes for 30 t years always had sfp scopes.
What scope are you mounting?
@@SocialRegressive 4x14 x44 blackhound putting on 22 long rifle
Very well done. Very informative for someone who is just now looking into subjects like these. I was able to gather great information that helped me make my decision on which way to go.
Ow man, thanks for the outstanding lesson! I'm from Brazil and trying to learn something about scopes at all and your video make things 110% more cleary to me! You've just got a new subscribe! I really appreciated that!
Howdy from Oklahoma, Felipe! I'm glad you enjoyed this video; I have another fun series coming up that you might appreciate. See you 'round!
سلام دوست عزیز خسته نباشید من از ایران مزاحم میشم من خواستم دوربین المنت هلیکس بگیرم و لکان 2 دارم واسه شکار اف اف پی بگیرم یا اس اف پی ممنون از تجربه عزیز استاد
A problem I ran into this year deer hunting with a diamondback 6x24x50 FFP scope was I was going to take a shot really early morning and couldn’t see the reticle and it’s not illuminated. The reticle is so fine it’s unusable in low light.
Great practical example. And that's a 4x zoom ratio. A 6x or 8x would be even worse. 😬
@@SocialRegressive FFP always benefits with IR...period.
Another great Video Buddy !!!
Coming from you, high praise indeed!
The way I use an LPVO, or even an old 3x9. Is to have the rifle by default in the minimum magnification. This is the setting for snapshooting and for finding the target if I find a target and it's far away enough that I need zoom I hold it on target and smoothly zoom up to max essentially every time. Now that Max would be somewhere between 7 and 10 power. So any ranging I do is going to be on max zoom and that will always be accurate because I'm going to roll the lover until I fell it bottom out. this method has always been quick for me and something I can do smoothly while staying on target. That is provided that the zoom knob on the scope isn't so stiff that I torque the rifle out of position while adjusting.
I have far less experience with a variety of scopes than you but I have generally had better luck actually keeping a target in my scope while zooming in on it with the second focal plane scopes versus the first. End up until recently per given level of quality there weren't even reasonable options within my budget for the first focal plane. I've used those mostly from friends who bought expensive names to impress people.
And a lot of the first focal plane scopes I've used had very unforgiving eye boxes which in my opinion kind of negated their usefulness outside of extreme long range and benchtop target practice.
Smart process. It's impressive that you can roll focus and stay on target in a practical scenario. Can't say I've done that much. s
Something to work on.
@@SocialRegressive well my experience was pretty weird. Is out getting into too much details consider it similar to prairie dog shooting from a boat. You had to have wide field of view to find the thing you were looking for stabilize on it and then a fair amount of zoom to get a clear shot. I would glass elements of a fishing net to estimate range since different elements of that had known distances. That and comparing the sudden the apparent size of the target to the duplex portion of the reticle. It was far from doing the advanced calculations like people do now for MRAD or MOA, It was if it's past this marker hold about here and if it's past that marker hold about there... I would say from observing a thing to shoot at to getting the shot off I would typically have between 5 and 10 seconds total having to drop some work thing and take the snapshot. So if I gave you the impression that first round hits were the expected norm then I would have misled you. It was get a shot that is close as quickly as possible and if you can snap off a couple of them then your odds improve.
@@SocialRegressive addendum it's worth noting that the pests I was shooting at would generally appear between about 30 ft and 300 yd. Most of them probably in the 150 to 200-yd range.
That's a good practical range. A lot like my prairie dog distances.
@@SocialRegressive I always wanted to try that. Looks like a lot of fun.
Really good explanation, I've watched several videos on this subject but struggled to understand until I watched this. Suddenly, they all make sense. Thanks.
Thanks, space man! Tell your friends. 😉
Thanks, that was much more clearer than a foggy scope of my understanding. Your video is clear & true! Now I can know what my needs are for scope shopping!
After watching 5 other "simplified" (LOL) videos on this topic... Yours is the most in depth, precise, and CLEAR... the ONLY thing you didn't mention that could effect all of this, is Eye Relief... depending on what you are putting your scope on (I have a Swedish Mauser) the distance from your eye to the ocular lens may be too far in order for you to load with stripper clips or with proper shell ejection... if I wish to use stripper clips to load with, I'll need an eye relief of at least 11 to 13 inches depending on where I hold my cheek on the butt... if I single load each round, and use a cantilevered scope mount, I might be able to get away with 7 to 9 inches... either way it must be a budget scope under $150... doable?
It's going to be tough to find a scout scope in your price range, but I'll bet you can find one. Try Vortex or Leupold. Those will solve your problems as long you're ok with second focal plane.
@@SocialRegressive SFP would probably be the better choice as FFP at low magnification is really tiny and at 9-13inches might be impossible to even see clearly without spending more for illumination... I was just at my local gun shop and checked out a red dot... eye relief isn't an issue as long as you can see the dot... but no magnification, so if I was out deer hunting that might make it a bit more difficult in low light... I was also going to check out a Reflex sight... but thanks for your input
This is an informative video on the pros and cons of each type of reticle placement.
Great plain talk explanation for newbies, thanks for the time you spend on this video. I mostly hunt deer at medium (50 yards) to long range (400 yards). My eye sight is not so good now just turned 60 this month. I am using the Fix by Q LLC, in .308. I have two questions for you if you have the time to answer me. 1. I wear glasses now and wanted to know if I should use or not use my glasses when sighting in and hunting with the rifle? 2nd I was curious as to what scope you would recommend I use and why? Again thanks for your time and expertise. Last note anyone else that reads this feel free to comment on my 2 questions.
Great questions. I don't wear glasses, so I don't feel qualified to weigh in on the first question. My initial reaction is to ask which way will make you more adaptable in the field. If you are farsighted, you might prefer to shoot without glasses so your 'off' eye can see the environment and bullet impacts. Adjust the diopter for your dominant eye. Picking a best scope is tricky, too. Personally I would lean toward a flexible zoom range: maybe a 3-12x44mm like the Nitro or Thrive I've reviewed, or a 2.5-10x44mm like the Nitro or Engage. If your eyes can handle it, FFP is very quick and accurate in the field, but if not, SFP is more visible.
ty
@@Tbones-xs7ys You bet!
Your level of sharing your knowledge in your content is top tier, and I really appreciate it.
That being said, do you think SFP is just as good for hunting groundhogs?
Absolutely. Since it's not a dynamic situation, SFP will work wonders.
Great job explaining the difference between the two. I liked the point about how much time you have to acquire the target. Makes sense. Hold over on FFP reticle at let's say 200 yards will always be the same, no matter which magnification?
But, hold over on SFP reticle will change, depending on magnification? I think it's how I understood it? Thanks, great video.
Nailed it. Which one sounds appealing to you?
@@SocialRegressive FFP does.
Excellent job man. I appreciate it. I'm trying to build an AR platform rifle and was trying to figure out what type of scope to put on it your vid helped
me out.
Did you see the extra video on ffp vs sfp LPVOs? That subject gets just a touch murkier. I like both.
@The Social Regressive No I didn't, but I'll check it out too. I enjoy adding to my knowledge belt.
Get an ACOG TA-31RCO- A4CP. It’s a fixed 4 power design with bullet drop compensation and ranging functionality. There is no better solution for any scenario and thus it’s why this optic is common to the USMC M16A4 Rifle. I am a Military Rifle Instructor assisting the USAMU deliver SDM Training and this concept being common to the SDMR Rifle too, I see Soldiers use it successfully within just a few minutes of familiarization. LPVOs are for the most part solving non-existent issues other than a novice shooter’s fantasies. What’s problematic with the LPVO is a distracting reticle that does not support an exacting understanding for where the rifle is pointed. One more thing, US Service Rifle Competitors prove the AR-15’s iron sights are sufficient even out to 1000 yards shooting at the long range target’s 44 inch bull, thus the 4 power ACOG is plenty of magnification to understand an E type target at any distance, as well as exactly where the rifle is pointed.
This was a great breakdown on the differences between the scopes. The graphic examples helped to seal the deal on the best option for my rifle. Very much appreciated and needed!
Which will you choose, and why?
Thank you. Learning so much even though I have been shooting for decades.
Great explanation! You always do a great job explaining whatever subject you focus on. I watched videos for weeks before deciding on a scope for my varmint rifle (17 WSM) most videos were yours. In the end, I got a scope that doesn't seem very polar amongst the social media types, but so far it has been a great scope for my purpose. It's a Mueller Eradicator 8.5-25X50. It has the finest reticle I've ever used, great optic for a value scope.
I killed most of my prairie dogs using the Mueller 8.5-25x44mm Mil-Dot scope. Good choice.
I bought FFP and for the type of hunting I do here in Indiana I would not recommend it. Target and long distances it is fantastic but in heavy woods it is not very useful. In low light conditions you can't see the reticle and subtensions! And when trying to track deer thru heavy thickets and woods it's basically useless.
Thank you very much for have the points explained so clearly and efficiently!
Glad it was helpful!
Superb video. I think I’m going to ditch the rifle scope I have now to get a first focal plane type. Do you know of a good place online to sell slightly used rifle scopes like Rudolph brand?
Good job. I have been watching many videos this one had a bit of almost everything. i wonder with a second focal plain scope how much you would need all that info on the reticle? if you go to zero magnification my 1 to 6 PA raptor looks close to a red dot witch should be good for close ranged targets right?
Exactly right. I usually only want those milling lines at higher magnifications.
I certain appreciate all your research and sharing it with us. Great Job! love it!
Best video on the subject I have found so far, thanks
I'm glad you found it useful, Angie! Good to meet you!
Great video examples and information! Thanks for the video!
Very informative. There is alot to take it here, I will be watching this again. Good job on the explanation 👍
I shoot FFP at steel or long-range. I have not hunted with a rifle in ten years (archery is how I hunt). That said, I plan on hunting Elk in October with a muzzleloader and am in the market for a good scope that may eventually end up on my 338 WIn Magnum. Everyone seems to say that the reticle becomes very small at low zoom (2.5-3.0) with FFP. I am looking closely at a Nightforce FX8 2.5-20 by 50 in both FFP and SFP. MY CONCERN IS NOT A LONG RANGE BUT CLOSE. CAN YOU ELABORATE ON WHAT YOU WOULD USE. VERY GOOD VIDEO BUT YOU DID NOT TALK MUCH ABOUT SHOTS AT CLOSE RANGE.
The small reticle at low magnification can be a problem, but most companies have found ways to make it work. A lower zoom ratio is good, like 4x. Illumination helps, too. But my favorite fix is when a reticle pairs fine measurements with a thick central circle or diamond. Check out the athlon helos 2-12x42mm Mil. The reticle works at all magnifications. You might like something like this one.
I am learning so much. Your an excellent teacher!
Thanks, Ray!
Some reticles have ranging feature when used with the power ring which also has distances marked on it. SFP Example Leupold Boone Crocket , turn power ring until known size target lines up with reticle, look at power ring the distance is marked on the power ring. Turn power ring to power using for your cartridge, then use the BDC reticle for the shot at the distance indicated. No extra .range finder or calc needed. 4.5-14x44 Now I'm wondering if they still make any like that
Brilliant.
@@SocialRegressive I have really enjoyed mine for hunting, quick and easy to use. Checking I see it appears they still have the reticle available, but not the ranging feature marked on the power ring. With All the new rangefinders and ballistic calculators we have now not worth the extra cost I guess. There are some used on ebay and such.
I’m still a little confused FFP sounds better for me because my eye site is not that could anymore. I don’t plan on shooting deer past 400yrds but would like to shoot targets out to 500yrds
Great video, after focusing in on ALL those scopes on that bench my hope of targeting in on one scope is getting blurry, haha ,. Omg. My head is blowing up ,. Look... I just want one , I'm more confused now than when I started this study ,. FFP 1 to 6 magnification eazy to read reticle 50 to 200 yards . Wow so much to know and learn . Thank you Buddy for an outstanding video . Signed. Lost in space
🤣Check out the US Optics TS-6X. I've used it in a variety of scenarios, including deer hunting at the exact distances you mentioned. I think Primary Arms makes one that's similar.
Ourstanding and informative, absolutely benchmark! Thanks for being such a valuable resource.
I'm glad you got something out of it! Tell your friends!
@@SocialRegressive What I most appreciate about your presentations is that you provide several contexts so that the viewer can tell if the parameters you suggest are relevent to him or her. I would have avoided a lot of mistakes had I had access to this video earlier.
I have a vortex crossfire 2 6x18x44 bdc sfp scope. If I sight it in full zoom at 200 yards, will my bullet hit the same spot when I zoom it out?
Unless the scope is broken, yes, you will have the same point of impact.
Thank you just the video I was looking for .
Have you jacked with the BDX optics any?? I accidentally got myself one in October and while I love the idea I haven’t even mounted it yet because the reticule is so off putting. I put a forge on that rifle and I’ll probably put the bdx on a deer rifle. It’s just an animal of a different kind and I haven’t committed to selling it nor using it yet
I'd like to try it. I'm a bit leery of electronics since they tend to fail first, but technology improves all the time. Cool concept.
For east coast woods deer hunting Sfp is best for me.
swampfox patriot 6-24×50
athlon argos btr gen2 6-24×50
blackhound genesis 6-24×50
primary arms slx with 6.5cm apollo reticle
arken sh4 gen2 6-24x50
for a ruger american predator 6.5 creedmoor in magpul hunter stock? mainly hunting out to 400 yards and occasionaly steel out to 1k. which one would you go with?
Those magnifications should be fine for 1k yards as long as you have enough adjustment range. I suspect you'll be posted up somewhere stationary for hunting. If not, you might consider something lighter and with a wider view. As for those models, I think Cyclops Joe Rhea has tested most or all. You should check his reviews.
thanks for making this series im 4 videos in. Great content
great video thank you, do you agree that either way you still need to be precise in knowing your distance to your target, it is okay for target shooting. Hunters want accurate shooting and need that accurate information quicker about their target distance. Will a laser fitted on the top of your scope inline set at cross-hairs at say 120 yards. As you move your distance from the target you laser beam will rise or fall accordingly from the center cross hair over and under 120 yards, the shooter just need to hold over the distance. Can you have a video showing this is it is correct or incorrect, i feel a lot of people would like to see this in action. or the types of lazers that would work for high power rifles at say 308.
That's an interesting idea, and yes, I think it would work, though it would be complicated to employ. You would need to mount the laser vertically offset from the scope, probably under the stock forend or considerably above the scope. Then you could create a chart that tracks the angular change at different distances, correlates it with your scope's reticle, then compares it to ballistic drop. The real challenges would be a lack of laser brightness as distances increase and an inability to detect minute changes as distances change. It might be easier and quicker (but more expensive) to run a rifle-mounted rangefinder.
Everything I Always Wanted to Know but Was too Afraid to Ask!
Thanks great series.
Cyclops sent me
Yet another finder's fee for Cyclops. Thanks for visiting!
What was the FFP scope and reticle you were using at the end of your video on the shooting range from 300m to 400 yards with the BDC?
This is the US Optics TS-20X with the JNG (?) reticle.
Nope. GenIIXR
@@SocialRegressive thank you very much. I liked the scopes layout.
awesome way to explain sfp and ffp! thanks !
Great content! One thing, magnification increase makes things look closer not larger. 2x does not make a six foot man look 12ft. It makes someone at 20 yards appear as if they were 10 yards. Subtle but important distinction. This is especially true for one like me with bad eyes. I wish they made the target look 2x as large.
Tomato or tomato
If you are using a fixed power scope, what difference would it make, which focal plane you use?
It wouldn't matter. I've never seen an ffp fixed-power scope.
Closer to 60 THAN 50, definitely 1st local plane. If you know where your weapon shoots, 1st focal plane will do it all
Great stuff,best explanation ive heard and ive listened to quite a few lately.
Cheers 👍
Thanks, Rob!
Wait, hold-on, ffp is not at all needed since the shooter can use his computer like brain for both wind and bullet drop compensation on known dimension target so a sfp with a simple mil or MOA scaled reticle for ranging is all that’s needed for successful shooting in any scenario. The bottom-line is novice shooters do not have the basis for critical thinking on the matter to choose wisely. For them it would be best to learn basic marksmanship from a sfp scope in a 3.5 - 15 power range which has a reticle that can lead the eye to a consistent sight picture. At any rate, this video is good but could be better if it illustrated reticles and demonstrated ranging, wind, and bullet drop compensation functions.
Ok, ok...so you're saying to zero a sfp at a different zoom level other than maximum magnification? I mean I see more at 3 than 9(fov) if my reticle is "supposed" to work at max magnification only, that deer is only 75 yards out. I don't need to count the ticks on it. Can't I just zero a sfp at 4x at 75yrds?
I always zero at max magnification, and the zero distance will be based on the round and what I'm going to do with it. Mostly I'm zeroed at either 100 yards or 200 yards.
Very good. Super helpful! Thank you!
Last part where it show shooting from 100-400Yrds, was using ffp or sfp scopes? Info on that scope please
This was the US Optics TS-20X with the MIL JNG reticle in first focal plane.
Perfect Explanation. Thanks
Now THAT was helpful. Thank you.
very good video, good explanation
I can’t get anyone to help me,this year I want to harvest a deer at 400 to 500 yds away with a custom made 308.Which one do you feel would be best for this,FFP or SFP,ty
Given your intended distances, I would choose an ffp scope 100%. That way you can keep your eye in the scope and hands on the rifle. No need to convert values, too. When speed matters, FFP rules.
@@SocialRegressive ty very much
How do you determine what to divide the max power by to figure out the ratio?
Divide the maximum by the minimum magnification. A 6-24 has a 4x zoom ratio.
Other UA-cam creators are saying the exact opposite as to the placement of the reticle. Who do we believe?
The groupthink moves around over time. This isn't about "best." It's about picking the right setup for what you're going to do. If you plan to shoot static targets, and you don't mind dialing, choose SFP. If your situation will get gnarly and fast, FFP is what I would take every time.
You explained this Very Well for the novice guy/gal that is New to the Shooting World. Very Well Done. I Subéd and hit the Like too❕👍🏼
Thanks, ELE! Tell your friends!
@@SocialRegressive WILL DO
Great explanations!
which one is better
Awesome video! Thanks
Glad you liked it!
Great explanation!! Thank you ..!!
Thank you for the useful information!
Very informative. Well done!
Felton Loop
Question... I have a 3-9 SFP, if I zero at 100 yards on 9 mag, will that translate when I zoom out ?
As long your scope ain't broken, that zero will hold steady.
@@SocialRegressive Thank you !!!
well done ,thanks
Really love your videos.
Thanks, Aussie!
Great info thanks
Simmons are very good scopes.
It's nice to see them rebounding. Still inexpensive, but much better than the models from ten years ago.
I agree. I bought a 3x9 Simmons from Wally mart just so my rifle wouldn't be naked and it turns out it's pretty darn decent.
Great content
Good info! Thanks brother!
I’ve never been “first” before. I’m seizing the opportunity this time. 😂
Rub it in Randy Emenheiser's face when you see him in the comments.
@@SocialRegressive Vini vidi vici!
thank you for information👍😊
I love those crazy SWFAs. They just work so well (especially Mil-hash) and don’t cost much.
Very good
Great Information.
Good stuff!
Wow that was great 👍
With a SFP scope. Zero 100 yards. If the target is at 600 yards if I adjust the turrets to take that shot none of the mill dots on the scope matter.
Some folks prefer that method. It's a cleaner view. I prefer the speed of advanced reticles, but to each his own.
I hear ranging a target is easier with a first focal plane scope is that true?
Most of the time, yes. As long as you know one size-measurement ratio you can get your measurement at any magnification. SFP in a high-magnification scope can be more precise, though.
It’s the exact same process, but one variable is removed (magnification).
Any Second Focal Plane scope with a ranging reticle in Mils or Minutes will only be “true” at a specific magnification power (10X, often). On a First Focal Plane scope, magnification doesn’t matter.
If your SFP scope is at the correct magnification, the method and means of ranging is identical to a FFP scope. But, if you are not at the correct magnification and forget to correct it, you will induce errors into your math that could cost you a hit.
Who uses the reticle instead of a rangefinder?
@@G5Hohn rangefinders are ideal but not always available (or practical) depending on target size, distance, or movement.
Knowing your Mil conversions and approximate target sizes usually works well enough for ranging at UKD precision rifle stages. You can memorize three or four gross ranging estimates in Mils for different target sizes (like 2/3 or 1/3 silhouettes) and get rough ranges really quickly.
@@G5Hohn Me
Superb
For me its pretty easy. I dont like math, so i prefer ffp. Plus i can with some practice guestimate the range quite accurately with 0 math! so.. yeah. ffp for the win i say
Ditto.
sfp is better. lets be real. most of people cant even shoot past 200 yards prone.
Very cool video, good explaining of the difference between the two reticle.
Looking forward to the next video :-))
Perez Mary Martinez Linda Garcia Sandra
Jones Jason Martin John Clark Sandra
👍👍👍
Gee, day four and ya haven't changed cloths! ;)
Good eyes. That'll be a plot point in video #8, I think.
Davis Donald Jackson Gary Miller Susan
😴😎👍
I never knew the difference....you have taught this old dog a new trick. Oh and even if i win the lottery....i cant pay 2500 for a scope....it goes against my cheapness....and couldnt hide that from the wife.
That's the nice thing about the modern market. You can get a lot of scope for $500 or less.
🇺🇦👍