Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
1st or 2nd plane reticles? |
Post Reply |
Author | |
DAVE44
Optics Journeyman Joined: November/11/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 652 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: November/23/2004 at 06:49 |
I have noticed that some scopes have their reticles in the second focal plane. Is this better or not. I am looking for a hunting scope for average ranges around 100 to 400 yards. I was looking at the Bushnell Elite 4200, Nikon Monarch and the Zeiss Conquest. The Nikon and Zeiss have 2nd plane reticles while the Bushnell has the 1st plane reticle. If I understand right the crosshairs stay the same size at every power setting in 2nd plane reticles while the crosshairs actually get larger as magnification increases on 1st plane reticles. I would think that 2nd plane would be better for really long range target shooting while 1st plane would be better for short range shooting. I not sure which would be better. Does it really matter that much? I would say 75% of my shots will be around 100 to 200 yards on 4 to 6 power on my scope. Which reticle is best for me?
|
|
Dale Clifford
Optics Jedi Knight Joined: July/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5087 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Your question is difficult to answer because you don't state your preferences. As for myself it is a question of watching the target and not the reticle, therefore of little consequence. The question changes at long distances with small targets that must be "studied" such as prarie dogs. The gun must be able to shoot 3-4" groups at 500 yds. which requires the reticle subtension to be small, (in addition to parallex problems). I prefer 1/8" subtension and fine cross hair of a true target scope. Others on this site think mil-dot or ballastic plex will work. Having used both, mil-dot seems to me it works best on targets at these ranges that have at least an 18" horizontal dimension and results in a "contact" shot not a precision shot with a gun having firing cone dispersion of most military weapons 3-8 inches (although I sure some out there are much less). Just hitting the target and not picking the place on the target. If you are just using 4-6 get a fixed power and avoid the entire problem of a variable.
|
|
ranburr
Optics Master Joined: May/16/2004 Status: Offline Points: 1082 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Actually, all of your coices, (including the Bushnell), are second plane reticle scopes. I prefer 2nd plane reticles because i want the reticle to stay the same size, regardless of the power setting. Also, it is what I and most Americans are used to. Does it really matter? Probably not. Just get the style that you are most comfortable with and works for you.
ranburr |
|
cheaptrick
MODERATOR Joined: September/27/2004 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20844 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I prefer FFP reticles for tactical scopes. Hunting scopes, RFP is OK. I agree with ranburr. Get the style you are used to. |
|
If at first you don't secede...try..try again.
|
|
redneckbmxer24
Optics Master Joined: June/02/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1055 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
for 100-400 yards i prefer the 2nd plane.
cory |
|
If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns, I'll be only one of millions!!!
|
|
gozarian
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 158 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
DAVE44, I prefer the reticles in the 2nd image plane. If you do
any distance shooting at small objects or a lot of shooting at the
range you'll find the FFP reticles will overshadow the target.
Kinda like looking through magnified fenceposts instead of crosshairs!
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |