Originally Posted By MSC182:
I’m sure this subject has probably been covered to death but a search didn’t turn up much. I’m starting to look for a scope and there’s seems to be quite a price difference between first and second focal plane scopes. I understand it’s where the reticle is relative to the magnification of the scope and depending the reticle will change size with power changes. Is there an advantage to one over the other? Is it more a function of the distances one is shooting?
View Quote
First post pretty much covered it. Choice depends on use. For any shooting you will be using the reticle then get FFP. Any match shooting like PRS etc. You can get away with SFP in hunting, or single position sports like BR or F Class.
Also the reticle does not change size when the power changes in FFP. It stays in relation to the target so it covers the same amount of the target at it's lowest power as it does at it's highest. In SFP the reticle does actually change size as it stays the same to the view meaning when the power changes and target gets bigger or smaller the reticle will cover more or less of the target. This is why the mil or moa graduations are not usable on any setting as they are on a FFP scope.
Most using FFP don't use the lowest powers as their primary use. If you buy a 4.5-27x FFP scope to use it on 4.5-6x most of the time then you chose the wrong optic. Pick the right tool for the job.