Which focal plane?

[fabsroman]

Good grief, the minutia of everything nowadays is painful. Once upon a time, decisions were simple because there wasn't much to pick from. Nowadays, good grief Charlie Brown.

Just watch a Burris video on focal planes. Front, rear, and dual. Really liking the dual focal plane concept.

Here is my question though, with the reticle on the second/front focal plane, what happens when you crank up the magnification for a long shot? The reticle size also increases and then you lose a lot of the hold over points, correct?

On a side note, I am somewhat pissed off at Burris right now. Just bought two of the RT-6 combo units because I did not see an XTR II offering for the AR-15 via the online catalog. However, now I realize that there are several XTR-II combo offerings that would work for me on an AR-15. Anyway, just a mini rant.

 

[E.Shell]

Good grief, the minutia of everything nowadays is painful. Once upon a time, decisions were simple because there wasn't much to pick from. Nowadays, good grief Charlie Brown.

Just watch a Burris video on focal planes. Front, rear, and dual. Really liking the dual focal plane concept.

Here is my question though, with the reticle on the second/front focal plane, what happens when you crank up the magnification for a long shot? The reticle size also increases and then you lose a lot of the hold over points, correct?

With a second focal plane scope, your reticle will be calibrated at one magnification, usually maximum.

When you reduce magnification, by half, for example, your target image shrinks in size, while the reticle remains the same, meaning the reticle value increases relative to the target. If you have mildots: At max, 1 mil = 1 mil. At half magnification, 1 mil = 2 mil.

So yes, you lose your holdover values, unless you figure out what the reticle is worth at other magnifications.

On a first focal plane scope, the reticle and target image change size together and the reticle is always calibrated.

 

[Pinecone]

You may lose some range of hold over, but you actually lose that with a second focal plane reticle also.

The shrinkage is to the total field of view.

Look at the entire reticle below. When you zoom to max magnification, you will still see all of the center area with markings.

The field of view at 100 years ranged from about 5 to 24 FEET. So you can, at minimum magnification, hold over 12 feet at 100 yards. Which means 120 feet at 1000 yards. Without dialing for elevation (which most people do).

At max mag, you still have 25 feet of holdover in the field of view at 1000 yards.

 

[outrider58]

FFP used to mean Expensive, but more and more companies are making more affordable FFP scopes.

 

[alucard0822]

FFP is nice if you shoot at various ranges with various magnification and need to range or holdover. Problem is the reticle tends to be busy and complicated with few that have daylight bright illumination. I like SFP on low power and 1-X scopes with daylight bright illumination, generally I just use 1x or low power and hold on target out to a couple hundred yards, by the time I get to 300 yards or further, then I just crank to full power, and the hold-over points are accurate. FFP are nice on my long range / high power scopes, where you want the field of view and reticle scale to be relatively consistent as you increase magnification with target distance.

 

[Magnumite]

Informative thread...

 

[erwos]

FFP is generally the better functional choice if you ever intend to use your reticle's holdovers. There is a lot of complaining about reticle size or whatever, but your mildot reticle will be exactly the same size on a 12x SFP scope and a 12x FFP scope when at 12x... it's just that the FFP scope mildots will be the right size on every other magnification, including when you don't quite get the zoom knob all the way to 12x by accident. As an example, when I was shooting out to 1000+ yds, I was STILL cranking my 5-30x scope back to 25x to get more FOV to see where my rounds were hitting. On an SFP scope, that would have been a non-starter unless I was dialing 100% of my corrections.

The reason some people people like SFP on LPVOs (1-X scopes) is because the larger reticle at 1x makes it easier to find the reticle faster, and when the shooter cranks the scope up for distance shots, it's always at max zoom. This is a much cheaper solution than trying to implement a daylight bright reticle in an FFP scope. The problem with this paradigm is that it starts running out of steam past about 6x top-end magnification. Shooting to 200-300 yards, you might not want to crank all the way to 8x or 10x, but in an SFP scope, this would render your reticle holdovers unusable. This is why people are jumping on the Vortex Razor GenIII and the S&B Short Dot - they give you the best of all worlds, albeit at a pretty substantial cost.

Dual focal plane is amazing. XTR II 1.5-8x is a really good scope for the money if you don't need to do both eyes open at 1x. It would have been a MUCH more popular choice for 3 gun if it had come out at 1-5x, maybe with slightly better glass. Unfortunately, the other DFP choices are either non-existent or radically more expensive.

All of that said, the RT-6 is a really good scope at its price point, and is generally considered the best entry 3 gun scope. I wouldn't be too sad about buying it.

 

[woodline]

For what is available on the market now, I think FFP makes sense where long range is prioritized, and SFP makes sense for where short range is prioritized. That seems to be changing with the Razor gen 3 1-10, but below $1000 I think most of us would be happier with our purchases if we prioritize. For LPVOs my general rule of thumb is SFP up to about 6x magnification, then FFP after that.

Example: Yesterday I snagged a new Trijicon Accupoint 1-4 with red triangle and post because I want a lightweight scope with a forgiving eyebox for a rifle that will primarily be shot on 1x. It was about 40%-50% off MSRP. If I wanted to use that scope at range for precision or wanted a reticle that scaled with magnification, that scope would have been a poor choice. Nope, I want a lightweight 1-4 with a big ol red dot. Some might argue that the Steiner P4Xi 1-4 would be a better choice, but none of those are on sale right now. If I don't like the accupoint, I can probably sell it for what I've got in it.

When it comes time to upgrade my 2 gun rifle, I will be going with a 1-8 or 1-10 FFP since Peacemaker has stages up to 500 yards. Having a daylight bright red dot won't be a priority there. Honestly I'd be surprised if I even turned the illumination on. The 1-6 PA SFP I have works, but small targets past about 250-300 yards are a little hard to PID sometimes. May end up going open class with the SWFA 2-10 lightweight scope and an offset red dot. Might be a better use of my budget, in the long run.

 

[erwos]

There have been rumors spread by Steve Fisher that Vortex has another LPVO coming out soon - I'd posit that this is going to be either a PST Gen III of some sort or maybe an FFP Razor 1-6x, but either one is probably worth waiting to see. Just remember that a 2-10x plus a dot puts you in unlimited/open for multi-gun, which is why a lot of people tend to shy away from that solution.

I use "daylight bright no hold" scopes like the Trijicon Accupoint or the Sig Whiskey5 on SBRs where I don't think it's likely that I'll be exceeding the "point blank" range of the rifle and I'm going to spend a lot of time on 1x. If you got a new-ish Accupoint 1-4x for $500, that's not a bad deal at all. It's quite a bit like using a reflex sight plus magnifier, just without some of the weight and with some eye relief constraints.

Just to give an idea of to my thought process, I've got about four more older Chinese scopes I'm probably going to upgrade at this point in order of priority:
1. Bushnell AR Optics FFP 5.56: this is riding on a 16" 5.45x39 AR. I need to chrono the gun and figure out if a BDC reticle is going to work for it. Given that I'm not using this for multi-gun, I'm leaning strongly towards the XTR II 1.5-8x DFP if it'll work with that BDC.
2. Bushnell AR Optics FFP .300AAC: I have this on a Sig 556R. I am looking for a deep-discounted Sig Tango6 to replace it, since my calculations seem to reveal the BDC as working for 7.62x39.
3. Pride Fowler Evo 3-12x FFP: I got this back from a warranty claim on my PFI RR-300 scope. It's on my RFB Hunter, which is a 24" bullpup 308. I'm targeting something in the 3-18x FFP range for it, since it doesn't have incredible accuracy. Illumination isn't a big deal.
4. Primary Arms 6x ACSS: this one is riding on my M+M M10-545 AK-alike. It's the original ACSS scope, not the 22lr version they sell now. The glass is... not good , or at least not up to my current standards. I am undecided about what the replacement is going to be. The giant fixed front sight gets in the way of LPVOs that are mounted low, but you also have cheek weld issues when mounting them high. I might switch back to a reflex sight on this.

 

[ironpony]

Can someone post informative video links they may have found, Thanks.

 

[fabsroman]

FFP is generally the better functional choice if you ever intend to use your reticle's holdovers. There is a lot of complaining about reticle size or whatever, but your mildot reticle will be exactly the same size on a 12x SFP scope and a 12x FFP scope when at 12x... it's just that the FFP scope mildots will be the right size on every other magnification, including when you don't quite get the zoom knob all the way to 12x by accident. As an example, when I was shooting out to 1000+ yds, I was STILL cranking my 5-30x scope back to 25x to get more FOV to see where my rounds were hitting. On an SFP scope, that would have been a non-starter unless I was dialing 100% of my corrections.

The reason some people people like SFP on LPVOs (1-X scopes) is because the larger reticle at 1x makes it easier to find the reticle faster, and when the shooter cranks the scope up for distance shots, it's always at max zoom. This is a much cheaper solution than trying to implement a daylight bright reticle in an FFP scope. The problem with this paradigm is that it starts running out of steam past about 6x top-end magnification. Shooting to 200-300 yards, you might not want to crank all the way to 8x or 10x, but in an SFP scope, this would render your reticle holdovers unusable. This is why people are jumping on the Vortex Razor GenIII and the S&B Short Dot - they give you the best of all worlds, albeit at a pretty substantial cost.

Dual focal plane is amazing. XTR II 1.5-8x is a really good scope for the money if you don't need to do both eyes open at 1x. It would have been a MUCH more popular choice for 3 gun if it had come out at 1-5x, maybe with slightly better glass. Unfortunately, the other DFP choices are either non-existent or radically more expensive.

All of that said, the RT-6 is a really good scope at its price point, and is generally considered the best entry 3 gun scope. I wouldn't be too sad about buying it.

Yeah, at first I was salty about getting the RT-6 combo instead of an XTR II for the AR-15s I have built up. However, the more I thought about it, the more I was fine with it. The AR rifles aren't very appealing to me, so I probably will not be shooting them very much.

Only reason I came across the XTR II lower powered scope combos is because I was looking at the higher powered XTR II for my Ruger Precision Rifles. Looking at those scopes brought up the XTR II combo applications for AR rifles and then looking at the different reticles on the higher powered XTR II scopes got me looking at videos on front vs rear focal plane.

Thanks for your response. That was super informative.

 

[erwos]

Put it this way: as someone who used an RT-6 for the multi-gun BDC aspect, the only optics I felt were really going to be substantial enough upgrades to justify their costs were the Sig Tango6 SFP 3-Gun or Vortex Razor Gen II(-E). Everything else is just not worth it, and that speaks pretty damned highly of the RT-6.

 

[alucard0822]

There have been rumors spread by Steve Fisher that Vortex has another LPVO coming out soon - I'd posit that this is going to be either a PST Gen III of some sort or maybe an FFP Razor 1-6x, but either one is probably worth waiting to see. Just remember that a 2-10x plus a dot puts you in unlimited/open for multi-gun, which is why a lot of people tend to shy away from that solution.

I use "daylight bright no hold" scopes like the Trijicon Accupoint or the Sig Whiskey5 on SBRs where I don't think it's likely that I'll be exceeding the "point blank" range of the rifle and I'm going to spend a lot of time on 1x. If you got a new-ish Accupoint 1-4x for $500, that's not a bad deal at all. It's quite a bit like using a reflex sight plus magnifier, just without some of the weight and with some eye relief constraints.

Just to give an idea of to my thought process, I've got about four more older Chinese scopes I'm probably going to upgrade at this point in order of priority:
1. Bushnell AR Optics FFP 5.56: this is riding on a 16" 5.45x39 AR. I need to chrono the gun and figure out if a BDC reticle is going to work for it. Given that I'm not using this for multi-gun, I'm leaning strongly towards the XTR II 1.5-8x DFP if it'll work with that BDC.
2. Bushnell AR Optics FFP .300AAC: I have this on a Sig 556R. I am looking for a deep-discounted Sig Tango6 to replace it, since my calculations seem to reveal the BDC as working for 7.62x39.
3. Pride Fowler Evo 3-12x FFP: I got this back from a warranty claim on my PFI RR-300 scope. It's on my RFB Hunter, which is a 24" bullpup 308. I'm targeting something in the 3-18x FFP range for it, since it doesn't have incredible accuracy. Illumination isn't a big deal.
4. Primary Arms 6x ACSS: this one is riding on my M+M M10-545 AK-alike. It's the original ACSS scope, not the 22lr version they sell now. The glass is... not good , or at least not up to my current standards. I am undecided about what the replacement is going to be. The giant fixed front sight gets in the way of LPVOs that are mounted low, but you also have cheek weld issues when mounting them high. I might switch back to a reflex sight on this.

I'm interested to see what Vortex has cooking, I'm a big fan of LPVO scopes. Everyone has their prefferences and style, but I generally like a clear image with relatively low magnification, I am not a benchrest or precision shooter, so i'm not really concerned with squeezing out tiny groups out far, compared to hitting a 4 MOA plate out to a few hundred yards consistently and quickly. I like the speed of a "red dot" up close, and would rather have a clean crisp daylight bright dot with little distortion out to 100 yards, and give up some magnification out further. For me personally, I can hit 18" and 24" plates out at Peacemaker's dreaded 500yd stage with a decent 1-6, or a good 1-4(Trij accupoint is definitely good), but it's hard to quickly double tap a row of targets 25 yards away through a magnified scope.

 

[nedsurf]

I vote for front focal plane. The vortex mil/mil one is great. For shots at lesser distances with the magnification at a lower setting, the milradian marks disappear and, to my eyes, functions as a regular cross hair reticle. For distant shots at greater magnification, I can see the milradian marks and can do the usual estimating distance with known dimension objects and holdover, kentucky windage etc... The mils are accurate at any magnification, not just the highest setting.

 

[erwos]

The optic everyone wants is a "Razor Jr" in the PST line, with a BDC reticle and illumination on par with the Razor gen2. I don't know that it would even need to be FFP or better than 1-6x, albeit either would be nice. The only thing that's kinda in that price range is discounted Sig Tango6Ts.

 

[woodline]

There have been rumors spread by Steve Fisher that Vortex has another LPVO coming out soon - I'd posit that this is going to be either a PST Gen III of some sort or maybe an FFP Razor 1-6x, but either one is probably worth waiting to see. Just remember that a 2-10x plus a dot puts you in unlimited/open for multi-gun, which is why a lot of people tend to shy away from that solution.

I'd be interested in such a scope from Vortex, but honestly they don't seem to bat an eye at releasing really heavy LPVOs. I may bite for a 1-8+ FFP with a very bright red dot and good glass (though I suppose that's generally what the LOW 1-8s give you), but otherwise I'll probably wait a few years and buy what I really want on sale/used. At this point I don't really "need" any new optics, and can afford to be patient for the right ones at the right prices to come along.

And I am aware of the offset red dot and 2-10 putting me in open, per my post. I compete for fun and some minor training value, so I don't really care how I do. What makes it more tempting is that I am finding it hard to give up the red dot on my G34 to stay out of open at Peacemaker. Especially since Thurmont and other places have started allowing slide mounted red dots in divisions other than open.

I use "daylight bright no hold" scopes like the Trijicon Accupoint or the Sig Whiskey5 on SBRs where I don't think it's likely that I'll be exceeding the "point blank" range of the rifle and I'm going to spend a lot of time on 1x. If you got a new-ish Accupoint 1-4x for $500, that's not a bad deal at all. It's quite a bit like using a reflex sight plus magnifier, just without some of the weight and with some eye relief constraints.

I got an open box dealer sample (from a dealer I trust) in as new condition for about $550 out the door. Was pretty happy with that. Meanwhile Scopelist was trying to sell me on an open box Steiner P4Xi for $640 OTD.

How do you like the whiskey5 LPVO? I noticed EuroOptic has them on blowout. Almost went with one, but finding good information on a discontinued Sig product can be challenging. The one youtube review I did see cited a very bright red dot as a plus, but an somewhat unforgiving eyebox as a minus. I've used accupoints a little before and felt that the eyebox/parallax from weird shooting positions was pretty forgiving.

For work several of us have gone back and forth between aimpoint, eotech, one or the other + magnifier, acog + rmr, and LPVO. The accupoint will probably end up on a "home defense" type 12.5" dedicated suppressed 5.56 rifle. If I don't like it on that, I'll put it on a 16" lightweight and maybe do an eotech/vortex huey + magnifier on the 12.5". I want something more than just a red dot, but finding something I am happy with has been a struggle. Hopefully the accupoint works out though.

 

[erwos]

It does have a slightly finicky eyebox on 5x when I was prone. Not awful, and you could dial it back if you had to resolve that. I also don't do a whole lot of prone shooting, which didn't help. I would personally not elect to use a scope sans BDC for multi-gun, but it's good for carbine classes and closer-in tactical shooting.

I have had a lot of success with a reflex sight plus magnifier, on rifles where I don't intend to shoot past about 300yds and usually shoot much closer in (like 10-50yds). One concept I've never seen fully explored is the use of newer reflex sights with BDC reticles (eg, ACSS) with magnifiers. My primary class/tactical SBR has the Sig Romeo6T w/ Juliet4 combination, and the small BDC dots on the Romeo's reticle come right into view when you put that magnifier in place.

 

[woodline]

It does have a slightly finicky eyebox on 5x when I was prone. Not awful, and you could dial it back if you had to resolve that. I also don't do a whole lot of prone shooting, which didn't help. I would personally not elect to use a scope sans BDC for multi-gun, but it's good for carbine classes and closer-in tactical shooting.

How was it from hasty or awkward positions on 1x? Tactical shooting would be what I am interested in the whiskey 5 for. Agree completely on a BDC, or at least a usable reticle in mils and know your holds.

I have had a lot of success with a reflex sight plus magnifier, on rifles where I don't intend to shoot past about 300yds and usually shoot much closer in (like 10-50yds). One concept I've never seen fully explored is the use of newer reflex sights with BDC reticles (eg, ACSS) with magnifiers. My primary class/tactical SBR has the Sig Romeo6T w/ Juliet4 combination, and the small BDC dots on the Romeo's reticle come right into view when you put that magnifier in place.

I really like the idea of a lightweight red dot with a BDC paired with one of the new gen 3x magnifiers that are pretty small. My work gun is running an eotech exps3 and the g33 magnifier at the moment. I am happy with it even though the weight is a bit higher than I would like. I prefer a holographic sight over a red dot when using magnifier for two reasons: my astigmatism makes red dots look weird sometimes, and I like that the holographic sight retains that nice precise 1 MOA dot under magnification. I would definitely like to try an eotech with a BDC type reticle with a magnifier. Pretty sure something like that would be perfect for me.

Once the vortex hueys come back in stock (I'm thinking they may be doing updates with this batch), I may try that guy out to see how it works with a 3x or 5x.

 

[erwos]

How was it from hasty or awkward positions on 1x? Tactical shooting would be what I am interested in the whiskey 5 for. Agree completely on a BDC, or at least a usable reticle in mils and know your holds.

If you can get a half-way decent cheek weld, you're fine. If you can't, it might prove tricky. But there's a lot of optics like that.

I really like the idea of a lightweight red dot with a BDC paired with one of the new gen 3x magnifiers that are pretty small. My work gun is running an eotech exps3 and the g33 magnifier at the moment. I am happy with it even though the weight is a bit higher than I would like. I prefer a holographic sight over a red dot when using magnifier for two reasons: my astigmatism makes red dots look weird sometimes, and I like that the holographic sight retains that nice precise 1 MOA dot under magnification. I would definitely like to try an eotech with a BDC type reticle with a magnifier. Pretty sure something like that would be perfect for me.

Yeah, I think the Eotech 4-dot is the only one that's really going to work for you if astigmatism is an issue.

 

[erwos]

Example pictures from my rifle. They aren't going to go down as the best pictures ever, but you can clearly see how the magnifier makes the BDC dots much more visible and usable.