2.5-10 FFP vs SFP?

Freedomblaster93

Freedomblaster93

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
325
Location
Wilson
Rating - 100%
26   0   0
I’ve been eyeing the new leupold mark4hd 2.5-10. It’s available as a FFP as well as SFP. My experience is limited with FFP scopes. I owned one awhile back and couldn’t get into it. I want to try it again but is there any reason to get a FFP on a scope with lower magnification? Gun will be used as a hunting rig as well as some mid range shooting.
 
I prefer FFP even on my 1-8x. Really just a matter of personal preference.

For me, I just KNOW that if I hold over on a target at distance, I’ll be wondering “am I at max magnification?..if I’m not, what’s the hold over ACTUALLY?!”

I want to know that the reticle is true no matter where I’m at in the zoom range.
 
In any optic 8x or higher FFP is the best option.

Think about it, you will "zoom in" due to what ever situation. In that situation you might need to o hold off, elevation or windage.

In FFP the scale is correct to do so
 
I guess my biggest question is how useable is a FFP reticle on the lowest setting( say 2.5 on a 2.5-10) I know this will largely depend on reticle selection. It is important to me that it is usable on the lower end settings due to a lot of hunting situations in eastern NC are pretty close distances.
 
Freedomblaster93 said:
This has been my very limited experience with lower power FFP. I was kinda hoping I was missing something.
Click to expand...
Nope,
You got it.

When your reticle resides in the first focal plane, its unit of measure scales proportionally with the field of view. For instance, imagine you're aiming through a scope with a MIL-based reticle in the first focal plane.

As you adjust your magnification, the size of the reticle and its MIL markings will change along with your field of view. This means that regardless of magnification, the subtensions on your reticle remain consistent relative to the target, aiding in accurate range estimation and holdover corrections.

At lower power the field of view is wider, so the reticle is smaller.

Remember the crucial connection between field of view and reticle measurement units.

Let's not get too twisted here, because on lower magnification settings and based on your sight-in distance, you really do not need the holdover until you are engaging past 300yds on large targets.

Smaller targets are a different story but the magnification is to support the shooters placement of the point of aim on the smaller targets.
 
The ancient Burris XTR-II 1-8x did it right. Their “dual focal plane” has a dot and doughnut in the SFP and a Mil reticle in FFP. In the same scope.
 
Freedomblaster93 said:
I guess my biggest question is how useable is a FFP reticle on the lowest setting( say 2.5 on a 2.5-10) I know this will largely depend on reticle selection. It is important to me that it is usable on the lower end settings due to a lot of hunting situations in eastern NC are pretty close distances.
Click to expand...
It's really not. For low magnification, hunting, LE sniper SFP is the way to go for the larger reticle.

As mentioned above, at longer distances/higher mag FFP is the way to go.
 
Freedomblaster93 said:
I guess my biggest question is how useable is a FFP reticle on the lowest setting
Click to expand...

Define "useable".

No, you wouldn't be able to use the hash marks for holdovers at 2.5x. But, at that magnification you're likely inside of MBPR anyway. The improved field of view and lack of clutter for point shooting is a major (in my opinion) benefit of the reticle "going away" at low power on an FFP.

Then, as you increase magnification for target ID and engagement, the holdovers/hash marks come back into view.
 
Last edited:
Tim said:
Define "useable".

No, you wouldn't be able to use the hash marks for holdovers at 2.5x. But, at that magnification you're likely inside of MBPR anyway. The improved field of view and lack of clutter for point shooting is a major (in my opinion) benefit of the reticle "going away" at low power on an FFP.

Then, as you increase magnification for target ID and engagement, the holdovers/hash marks come back into view.
Click to expand...
“usable” as in a decent sight picture at the low end power obviously not worried about holds as that would be at say 15 yards or so. This rifle needs to be functional and fast from about 15 yards in fairly thick woods out to about 400. I’d love to stick around 1k price point,but I know I probably won’t get what I want with illuminated reticle and parallax adjustment for that price.
 
Freedomblaster93 said:
I guess my biggest question is how useable is a FFP reticle on the lowest setting( say 2.5 on a 2.5-10) I know this will largely depend on reticle selection. It is important to me that it is usable on the lower end settings due to a lot of hunting situations in eastern NC are pretty close distances.
Click to expand...
I just mentioned in another thread, I use a 2-12 Athlon FFP on my 14.5 AR and do everything from Tim's 2 gun matches that have targets relatively close and sniper/DMR stuff that has smallish targets out to 700 at times and it excels at everything in between.
When you dial the zoom back, ignore the fine aspects of the reticle and treat it as a red dot, when zoomed in the reticle can be used with a decent amount of precision.
It also has illumination, so dawn/dusk hunting isn't out of the question. I wouldn't hesitate to put it on a dedicated hunting rifle.
I'm a FFP guy all the way, I'm sure SFP has a place for someone somewhere but not for me on any of my rifles.

Athlon Helos BTR Gen2 2-12 for reference.

Also, heres a picof some turkeys that decided to cross the steel at 600 through the scope I mentioned.

Screenshot_20240328-162130_Gallery.jpg
 
I’ve looked at the Leupold 4-12 options because they are so dang light for an illuminated reticle and all the magnification I would need. But they are SFP… And if I want to use the dots in a TMR reticle, 12x is perhaps more than I need should I device to practice dialing at 3-400 yards. But they are still tempting, at like 15oz. It seems like a high jump in capability added to a light carbine.
 
Interesting read. I have both SFP and FFP scopes. For hunting I prefer SFP. As legal shooting time approaches and light begins to fad, especially in woodlands, I turn the magnification down to take advantage of whatever light remains. With the SFP my reticle remains the same. With FFP at low power you are basically looking through an empty tube as the reticle is almost non-existent. The only option would be to have a floating illuminated dot. For shooting at distance and ranging targets FFP is the way to go. To some extent that would be fine for hunting although I would not shoot at game at those distances (say beyond 300 yards). I know guys that brag about shooting animals at far distance but all you hear are their success stories, never shots they take at animals that they muck up. I also shoot a lot of targets at fixed ranges where a SFP scope is preferred. As you adjust your magnification to compensate for mirage it's nice to have a constant reticle size. And many targets are set up in moa. If you can see your hits you can adjust easily using the target and/or your reticle. Once again it is based on what you will be primarily doing with your "kit". That is why I have a variety of rifles and calibers for both hunting and target shooting. It's a challenge to have one do-it-all rifle/scope combo. :)
 
I’ve been looking at the same leupold. I have 2 mk4’s, but for my hunting rifle, I think the tract 2.5-15 is a better scope. Under $1000 for illuminated also.
 
Don't sleep on the Trijicon credo 2-10x36 ffp. I really like the reticle on that scope.
 
Downeast said:
With the SFP my reticle remains the same.
Click to expand...
But…does it?

Sure, what you ‘see’ remains the same. But the subtensions (hash, hold overs) change as the magnification changes. The 2 MOA line isn’t actually 2MOA unless you’re at max power. And, it’s not just a “little” bit off; it’s off by some multiple of the magnification change.

In my mind if you have a “3-10x” or whatever SFP optic, what you REALLY have is a “3 OR 10”.

All that range in-between is either guesswork or requires math while under some level of stress. FFP, there’s zero difference as you zoom.

It’s probably a 9mm v 45 type debate. Both have their claims, just the .45 guys won’t admit they’re wrong. =)
 
Tim said:
But…does it?

Sure, what you ‘see’ remains the same. But the subtensions (hash, hold overs) change as the magnification changes. The 2 MOA line isn’t actually 2MOA unless you’re at max power. And, it’s not just a “little” bit off; it’s off by some multiple of the magnification change.

In my mind if you have a “3-10x” or whatever SFP optic, what you REALLY have is a “3 OR 10”.

All that range in-between is either guesswork or requires math while under some level of stress. FFP, there’s zero difference as you zoom.

It’s probably a 9mm v 45 type debate. Both have their claims, just the .45 guys won’t admit they’re wrong. =)
Click to expand...
This is my feeling about all LVPO below 6 power.
 
I guess my wording..."remaining the same" was not a proper statement. For long range shooting I find that the "fixed" reticle of a SFP scope is more advantageous than a FFP scope. I have observed FFP reticles at high magnification actually cover up the target, making it very difficult to see and hit the bullseye. You just try to center the reticle and hope for the best. It's hard to shoot inside the reticle. Again, it depends on your style of shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tim
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom