Rifle Scopes High-end SFP scopes
- Thread starter sititunga
- Start date
Some people only shoot at known distances and want nice glass, but don't want to spend an additional $1000 on their optic. More cash for ammo and practice!
Last edited:
Not many range with a reticle anymore and those who do rarely need to do so on lower powers. FFP has its benefits but also has its drawbacks.
IMO, FFP is most useful for scopes in the 15X + range where you may need to dial down due to mirage or FOV yet still use your reticle for wind / holds.
I have never missed it on scopes in the 2-10X range.
IMO, FFP is most useful for scopes in the 15X + range where you may need to dial down due to mirage or FOV yet still use your reticle for wind / holds.
I have never missed it on scopes in the 2-10X range.
I use a 2.5-10 SFP scope and am very conscious of my power setting for holdovers and hold unders. 1 mil versus 2 mils versus 4 mils, is a big difference!
Last edited:
Thats why FFP is an option for some
.For me though, if I am holding for elevation or wind chances are my power is set to 10X or more.
Different strokes for different folks.
Thats why FFP is an option for some
For me though, if I am holding for elevation or wind chances are my power is set to 10X or more.
Different strokes for different folks.
But 10 power is sometimes too much magnification especially at distances under 300.
I still prefer SFP for long range stuff. I also prefer SFP in a hunting optic of the 2.5-10x range. For high end SFP, a Nightforce ATACR would get my money every time. It all comes back to being a training issue. It also comes down to application. Pros and cons to both.
Personally, with shots under 300 yards, wind and elevation is rarely an issue unless we are talking shooting tiny targets or groups, in which it would make most sense to use your highest power with a 2-10 scope. But, that does not always hold true for every shooter. Still, in most cases at short ranges a S.W.A.G. works even if your reticle is not on the correct power setting.
Last edited:
Wait til you hit 50 years old, 10 power wont be too high, it wont be enough for 100 yrds, and the FFP reticule cranked all the way out is too small on a FFP scope. I got both and still prefer the SFP , as far as ranging with a scope, its been done a long time before FFP ever showed up. I will say this though, on my bushy FFP the glass seems to be slightly better than the SFP same with the Vortex FFP, could be my imagination but it seems better to my old eyes.
What are the cons of an FFP scope?
Mainly the reticle being too thin at low magnification, resulting in poor visibility in low light. This can be mostly remedied by illumination, but that adds to cost and weight. Also, the reticle can be too thick at high magnification resulting in the reticle occluding the target. Price can be considered a con as well, it is more of a complex arrangement and requires more precision in build quality; i.e. more expense. These are trade offs most of us are willing to make depending on application and magnification range.
I hate ffp scopes that's why
I agree. even though I have 3 FFP scopes I much prefer my NightForce SFP scopes.
Hensoldt and March would my money go to. Hensoldt has a 6-24x56 while March has....ahhh....hang on a sec....ahhh....how much time do you have to read this thread? Well, just to make it short, March has a zillion alternatives of SFP scopes, all top of the line and all 8x and 10x powered. Need not to look elsewhere,
I thought I was the only one? I have a couple of FFP optics, and they work just fine. I just prefer SFP.
Have to agree with whiskey 9514. I just don't like them. IMO at low power they are not good for ranging due to the reticle being so small, I think it's a real personal preference either way you go.
Similar threads
