Also, is first focal plane have a better advantage?
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
First focal plane (F1) I find is very useful IF you have correction tables or graphs in MOA (or MIL) as the stadia (etc) references remain accurate regardless of what power (a variable) scope is set at.
Otherwise an F2 scope's reticule references varies w/ magnification setting. So, to overcome that you either have to "dial" the E/W knobs for the appropriate off-set (assuming you have off-set charts or tables calibrated in (INCHES) AND your scope tracks reliably...and many DO NOT), OR just "SWAG" the hold-off. NOTE: One can use the reticule on F2 scopes for accurate hold-off, but only AFTER MOA has been correlated to the reticule at the various ranges. That way a reticule, e.g., a duplex, can very accurately be used to establish exact hold-off (important if no followup shot is likely available).
One of the disadvantages of the F1 reticule is the thickness of the crosshairs "blooms" with the power setting. This can be problematic at the higher magnification settings, which can handicap the shooter if the crosshairs obscure the target - especially small varmints and long range.
My SHV Nightforce (F1) scope's (MOAR) reticule is sufficient for small varmints to the relatively modest 14x max power setting. And that scope (or another F1 scope) might be just the right combination of modest magnification and limited range of a 17 caliber. That's my theory, and I'm sticking toit!
PS:
That said, for my long range varmint/target AR upper, I have a fine duplex reticule in the Nikon Monarch F2 5x25x50 BECAUSE really discriminating target work at long range won't tolerate "blooming" crosshairs.
Summary (IMO): Modest ranges = F1 as long as target is NOT obscured significantly (some scopes are better than others). F2 for very fine/small targets at long range and high power settings.
.
.
Well, that's cuz mebby I didn't 'splain it very well.
I used F2 scopes all my life. It wasn't until I got into "one shot, one kill" as a preferred style that I started using the combination of accurate ballistics tables/graphs printed out for the exact conditions for that location and day, and then applying the data to the reticule graduated with (MOA or MIL) references.
The reticules (F2) of the Leupold Vari-X III, etc., just got to be too much figgerin', and required too much guess work. So, for me, the switch to the F1 scope ended all the BS conversions after changing magnification. With the F1, no matter what the magnification power setting was, the (MOA) reticule remained true, far as hold-off values were concerned.
Edit:
In short, if you want precise hold-off, with the "standard" F2 scopes just crank the off-set onto the knobs*. A quality scope will track reliably and you can take the shot with confidence.
But, if you're using an F1 scope, you have the option to crank the knobs, or touch nothing and just reference the off-set directly to the reticule for precise point of aim.
*A DUPLEX scope reticule can be used effectively for precise off-sets if the shooter knows how many (MOA/MIL) there is from the crosshair intersection to where the crosshairs thicken. For example: A Leupold Vari-X III set on 20X magnification is 1-1/2 MOA (6 clicks) from the crosshair intersection to where the lines (of the DUPLEX reticule) thicken.
Nightforce SHV F1 MOAR reticule
.
Attachments
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
