Rifle Scopes SFP for Hunting?
- Thread starter BFuller
- Start date
Re: SFP for Hunting?
if you were planning on a mildot type reticle and using holdovers then I think FFP is huge in a hunting scope because typically I don't have my hunting scopes on max power, and you may not have time to verify/change power etc. Obviously if it's just a duplex reticle then it's not an issue and there's no reason to pay for it.
You'll find there's not a lot of quality options under $1000 for FFP scopes.
The bushnell 4200 3-12x44 FFP isn't a bad option and quite a few places have them on sale right now, maybe the best currently available in that price range. The knobs are IMO too big for a hunting scope but low profile knobs are almost unheard of of tactical scopes these days much less FFP ones, the trend seems to be for knobs so big you need two hands to adjust them.
The Vortex PST could fit the bill, but it's not available yet, and it's hard to say when it will be with all the backorders and delays. Also it's a new scope on the market, and I never like paying to be a beta tester for companies to work the kinks out of a new model.
if you were planning on a mildot type reticle and using holdovers then I think FFP is huge in a hunting scope because typically I don't have my hunting scopes on max power, and you may not have time to verify/change power etc. Obviously if it's just a duplex reticle then it's not an issue and there's no reason to pay for it.
You'll find there's not a lot of quality options under $1000 for FFP scopes.
The bushnell 4200 3-12x44 FFP isn't a bad option and quite a few places have them on sale right now, maybe the best currently available in that price range. The knobs are IMO too big for a hunting scope but low profile knobs are almost unheard of of tactical scopes these days much less FFP ones, the trend seems to be for knobs so big you need two hands to adjust them.
The Vortex PST could fit the bill, but it's not available yet, and it's hard to say when it will be with all the backorders and delays. Also it's a new scope on the market, and I never like paying to be a beta tester for companies to work the kinks out of a new model.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
you could say that, but i also say if something is far enough away im actually worried about my hold for wind enough im actually using my moa hash marks==========im gonna be at full mag! issue null and void! and the best part, is that my reticle is always the same size.......
different strokes, but unless you are going to be holding wind of 2 moa or more at low magnification, i wouldn't worry about it.
you could say that, but i also say if something is far enough away im actually worried about my hold for wind enough im actually using my moa hash marks==========im gonna be at full mag! issue null and void! and the best part, is that my reticle is always the same size.......
different strokes, but unless you are going to be holding wind of 2 moa or more at low magnification, i wouldn't worry about it.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
I prefer SFP for hunting. Another good option in that price range is the Zeiss Conquest.
I prefer SFP for hunting. Another good option in that price range is the Zeiss Conquest.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
My buddy usess the higher end ziess hunting scopes that are FFP and only have a duplex reticle. I have no idea what the purose of this is but I dont like how the reticle gets bigger and smaller and the field of view does not seem to be as wide as a SFP. Can anyone tell me about the field of view on FFP vs SFP.
My buddy usess the higher end ziess hunting scopes that are FFP and only have a duplex reticle. I have no idea what the purose of this is but I dont like how the reticle gets bigger and smaller and the field of view does not seem to be as wide as a SFP. Can anyone tell me about the field of view on FFP vs SFP.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
SFP/FFP: use whatever you prefer. Since most everyone has a range finder these days, I don't see any compelling need or even a reason for a FFP scope. I think an illuminated reticle would be a much more useful feature in a hunting scope.
Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski, that's what I'd look at.
SFP/FFP: use whatever you prefer. Since most everyone has a range finder these days, I don't see any compelling need or even a reason for a FFP scope. I think an illuminated reticle would be a much more useful feature in a hunting scope.
Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski, that's what I'd look at.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
I do things to save money as well. For a hunting scope a SFP is fine for me, and I use it without any problems at all. I make it work.
I have a mark on my 15 power scope at approx 7.5 (no its not right on) so that I can mil at 2 different power settings.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Scooter-PIE</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SFP/FFP: use whatever you prefer. Since most everyone has a range finder these days, I don't see any compelling need or even a reason for a FFP scope. I think an illuminated reticle would be a much more useful feature in a hunting scope.
Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski, that's what I'd look at.</div></div>
We all shoot differently, but this is crazy talk for MY style of shooting. I hold, not dial for wind, and sometimes I have to power down to defeat the mirage. It's about corrections and wind holds for me, because I too just pull out the LRF.
I do things to save money as well. For a hunting scope a SFP is fine for me, and I use it without any problems at all. I make it work.
I have a mark on my 15 power scope at approx 7.5 (no its not right on) so that I can mil at 2 different power settings.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Scooter-PIE</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SFP/FFP: use whatever you prefer. Since most everyone has a range finder these days, I don't see any compelling need or even a reason for a FFP scope. I think an illuminated reticle would be a much more useful feature in a hunting scope.
Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski, that's what I'd look at.</div></div>
We all shoot differently, but this is crazy talk for MY style of shooting. I hold, not dial for wind, and sometimes I have to power down to defeat the mirage. It's about corrections and wind holds for me, because I too just pull out the LRF.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
SFP for me. Just got in my vortex viper pst 2.5-10, and i think it is going to be a great hunting scope. I always dial elevation, and i have my dope memorized out to 600 so i havent' found a need for FFP yet. I'm probably the only guy who thinks this way, but i have steered away from scopes above 10 power for hunting so i don't have to worry as much about parallax as a higher mag scope. This has been one of my criteria in scopes, because i normally don't have time to adjust parallax, and i don't want something else to make me more likely to gimp something up any more than my bad shooting already does.
SFP for me. Just got in my vortex viper pst 2.5-10, and i think it is going to be a great hunting scope. I always dial elevation, and i have my dope memorized out to 600 so i havent' found a need for FFP yet. I'm probably the only guy who thinks this way, but i have steered away from scopes above 10 power for hunting so i don't have to worry as much about parallax as a higher mag scope. This has been one of my criteria in scopes, because i normally don't have time to adjust parallax, and i don't want something else to make me more likely to gimp something up any more than my bad shooting already does.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
Having done it both ways a fair amount, my advice is if you're planning to use the reticle for anything (holdover or wind) FFP is the smart choice. Especially if the scope is above 10X.
While you may be able to crank the scope to max power any time you want to use the reticle on a sunny day at the range, it's often not practical or advisable when hunting. From low light conditions where you just can't see very well on max power to issues of speed--if the animal does happen to take off running after the shot and your scope is cranked up to 24X, good luck getting on him again quickly for a followup shot. Those things are less of an issue with a scope that maxes out at 10X though.
If you plan on using the scope for quick holdovers, how quick do you want to be? Hunting can be similar to a timed match in that it can be a pretty high pressure situation when the action starts happening. The term "buck fever" was coined for a reason. Planning to use a reticle that can only be used on one power, a power you typically don't walk around with the scope set on is almost setting yourself up for a mistake.
While naturally not all scopes are created equal, a good FFP reticle, especially with good illumination, is as good at any power and in any possible hunting situation as a SFP reticle. There is simply no advantage to be had with SFP. If you were talking about varmint hunting that would be different--lots of good FFP reticles could be deemed "too thick" for that. But not hunting big game.
So when there is nothing to gain, no advantage to be had with a SFP reticle, why would somebody choose the handicap of effectively turning their variable into a fixed power scope anytime he wants to use the reticle?
Of course all of the above only goes for those planning to use the reticle for something in the field. If you're going to only use it as a glorified duplex, it obviously doesn't really matter.
Having done it both ways a fair amount, my advice is if you're planning to use the reticle for anything (holdover or wind) FFP is the smart choice. Especially if the scope is above 10X.
While you may be able to crank the scope to max power any time you want to use the reticle on a sunny day at the range, it's often not practical or advisable when hunting. From low light conditions where you just can't see very well on max power to issues of speed--if the animal does happen to take off running after the shot and your scope is cranked up to 24X, good luck getting on him again quickly for a followup shot. Those things are less of an issue with a scope that maxes out at 10X though.
If you plan on using the scope for quick holdovers, how quick do you want to be? Hunting can be similar to a timed match in that it can be a pretty high pressure situation when the action starts happening. The term "buck fever" was coined for a reason. Planning to use a reticle that can only be used on one power, a power you typically don't walk around with the scope set on is almost setting yourself up for a mistake.
While naturally not all scopes are created equal, a good FFP reticle, especially with good illumination, is as good at any power and in any possible hunting situation as a SFP reticle. There is simply no advantage to be had with SFP. If you were talking about varmint hunting that would be different--lots of good FFP reticles could be deemed "too thick" for that. But not hunting big game.
So when there is nothing to gain, no advantage to be had with a SFP reticle, why would somebody choose the handicap of effectively turning their variable into a fixed power scope anytime he wants to use the reticle?
Of course all of the above only goes for those planning to use the reticle for something in the field. If you're going to only use it as a glorified duplex, it obviously doesn't really matter.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Scooter-PIE</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SFP/FFP: use whatever you prefer. Since most everyone has a range finder these days, I don't see any compelling need or even a reason for a FFP scope. I think an illuminated reticle would be a much more useful feature in a hunting scope.
Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski, that's what I'd look at. </div></div>
For me it's ffp all the way.
It's not about ranging (LRF anyone?), but holdovers.
A mil is a mil is a mil with ffp. If my holdover for 400 yards (just throwing this number out there) is 2 mils, it's 2 mils whether I'm at 3x or 5x or 6x or 1,294,389.6x.
It's never a guess.
It's also about consistency. All of my rifles have ffp mil/mil scopes. They're not all the same scope, but they all have the same math.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Scooter-PIE</div><div class="ubbcode-body">SFP/FFP: use whatever you prefer. Since most everyone has a range finder these days, I don't see any compelling need or even a reason for a FFP scope. I think an illuminated reticle would be a much more useful feature in a hunting scope.
Leupold, Nikon, Zeiss, Swarovski, that's what I'd look at. </div></div>
For me it's ffp all the way.
It's not about ranging (LRF anyone?), but holdovers.
A mil is a mil is a mil with ffp. If my holdover for 400 yards (just throwing this number out there) is 2 mils, it's 2 mils whether I'm at 3x or 5x or 6x or 1,294,389.6x.
It's never a guess.
It's also about consistency. All of my rifles have ffp mil/mil scopes. They're not all the same scope, but they all have the same math.
Re: SFP for Hunting?
If you have a rangefinder go SFP. Otherwise spend the $300 left over and go get one. Just my .02
If you have a rangefinder go SFP. Otherwise spend the $300 left over and go get one. Just my .02
