First Focal Plane vs. Second Focal Plane Riflescopes: Which Is Better for Long Range Hunting?

First focal plane versus second focal plane is one of those riflescope debates that tends to get treated as though one design is clearly superior to the other. I don’t think it’s that simple.

I’ve used both, and my preference is first focal plane, particularly for long range hunting. But I would not let focal plane alone dictate which scope I bought. FFP and SFP are a tradeoff, and while I prefer FFP, scope mechanics matter more than whether the reticle is in the first or second focal plane.

The important thing is understanding what each system actually does, where each has an advantage, and how you intend to use the reticle in the field.

What Is a First Focal Plane Reticle?

With a first focal plane, or FFP, riflescope, the reticle changes apparent size along with the target as magnification changes.

If you increase magnification from 5X to 25X, the target appears five times larger and the reticle appears five times larger as well. Because they increase together, the angular relationship between the reticle and the target stays the same.

That means a 1 MOA mark is still 1 MOA whether the scope is at 5X, 12X, 18X or 25X.

That is the fundamental advantage of FFP.

The Revic RH2 is a good example of a hunting-oriented FFP reticle. The reticle is designed so that its subtensions remain consistent throughout the magnification range.

What Is a Second Focal Plane Reticle?

A second focal plane, or SFP, reticle behaves differently.

When magnification changes, the target image gets larger or smaller, but the reticle maintains the same apparent size to the shooter.

That makes the reticle very consistent visually, but the angular value represented by its hash marks changes as magnification changes.

The ZEISS ZMOA-1 is a good example of a second focal plane hunting reticle. At its calibrated magnification, the reticle’s MOA markings represent their stated values. Away from that magnification, the apparent reticle size remains the same while the angular value of those marks changes.

The Biggest Advantage of First Focal Plane

For me, the biggest FFP advantage is very simple:

The reticle is always correct.

If my ballistic solution calls for a 6 MOA wind hold, I can hold 6 MOA regardless of where the magnification ring happens to be.

That matters more in actual hunting than it might sound like on paper.

Let’s say I’m preparing for a long shot with the scope at 25X. Mirage becomes severe enough that I can’t resolve the target well at that magnification, so I back the scope down to 18X.

With FFP, nothing else changes.

My 1-MOA marks are still 1 MOA. My 6-MOA wind hold is still 6 MOA. If I spot the first shot 2 MOA right, a 2-MOA correction through the reticle is still 2 MOA.

There is no additional math and no need to return the scope to one particular magnification before using the reticle.

For someone who routinely dials elevation and holds wind, that is a substantial advantage.

Why FFP Makes Sense for Long Range Hunting

There are several situations where I especially like FFP.

• If conditions force me to change magnification, the reticle remains useful.
• If an animal moves closer or farther and I need to adjust magnification quickly, the reticle remains useful.
• If I am spotting a shot through my own scope, I can measure the correction directly.
• If I need a wind hold, I don’t have to look at the power ring first.

That removes one more thing the shooter has to remember when there may already be a lot happening.

For long range hunting, simplicity under pressure has value.

The Biggest Disadvantage of First Focal Plane

FFP has a real disadvantage, and anyone considering one for a hunting rifle should understand it.

The reticle gets smaller as magnification decreases.

At low enough magnification, a fine FFP reticle can become difficult to see.

That’s especially relevant in situations such as timber, dark backgrounds, low light, close-range shots, or trying to acquire an animal quickly.

This is why simply saying “FFP is better” misses part of the story.

A reticle has to be designed properly for its intended magnification range.

FFP Reticle Design Matters

There is a balancing act with any FFP reticle.

Make it too fine and it can disappear at low magnification.

Make it too heavy and it can cover too much of the target at high magnification.

The wider the magnification ratio becomes, the harder that balancing act can be.

This is one reason I think the actual reticle design can be more important than simply reading “FFP” on the specification sheet.

A well-designed FFP hunting reticle should behave almost like a simpler hunting reticle at low power and reveal more usable detail as magnification increases.

The Biggest Advantage of Second Focal Plane

The strongest argument for SFP is almost the exact opposite.

The reticle maintains the same apparent size at every magnification.

If you like the thickness and visibility of the reticle at 25X, it does not suddenly become tiny when you turn the scope down to 5X.

For a hunting rifle, that can be a significant advantage.

In dark timber or during fading light, a bold reticle that remains easy to acquire can be preferable to a very fine FFP reticle.

And because the center aiming point does not change, an SFP scope can work extremely well for a shooter who primarily dials ballistic corrections.

SFP Can Be Excellent If You Dial

This is an important distinction.

Suppose your normal procedure is to range the animal, dial your elevation, and use the reticle primarily to hold wind—or perhaps you even dial both elevation and wind.

If you’re primarily aiming with the center crosshair after dialing the correction, the focal-plane difference becomes much less important.

The center of the scope is still the center of the scope whether you’re at 10X or 25X.

An SFP design can therefore be extremely effective for a hunter who uses his turrets more than his reticle.

The Biggest Disadvantage of Second Focal Plane

The primary disadvantage of SFP is that reticle subtensions are not constant throughout the magnification range.

With the ZEISS ZMOA-1, for example, the reticle’s markings are calibrated to represent their stated angular values at the specified reference magnification. Away from that setting, the value represented by those marks changes.

That doesn’t mean the reticle suddenly becomes unusable.

It means you have to know what it represents.

As a simple example, imagine a scope whose reticle is calibrated so that each hash represents 1 MOA at 20X.

At 10X, those same apparent spaces would represent approximately 2 MOA.

At 5X, approximately 4 MOA.

That can actually increase the amount of angular correction available in the visible reticle, but it requires the shooter to understand the relationship between magnification and subtension.

Where SFP Can Get You Into Trouble

The problem isn’t that SFP is inherently inaccurate.

The problem is forgetting what magnification you’re on.

Imagine a hunter who normally shoots with a scope at its calibrated power and instinctively uses the fourth hash mark as a 4-MOA wind hold.

He backs the scope down significantly because of mirage or field of view.

Now he uses the same fourth mark without thinking about the changed subtension.

The reticle has not failed.

The shooter has simply used the wrong angular value.

With FFP, that particular mistake is eliminated.

SFP Has Another Interesting Advantage

Because the reticle stays visually the same size while the target gets smaller at lower magnification, SFP can sometimes provide much more angular holdover or windage within the same visible portion of the reticle.

That can be useful.

A shooter who understands the system can deliberately reduce magnification and effectively expand the angular range represented by the reticle.

So I don’t view changing subtensions as automatically making SFP inferior.

It is simply a different system and requires the shooter to know the scope.

Low-Light Hunting

This is one area where SFP deserves serious consideration.

An animal at close range in dark timber presents a very different problem than an elk standing in the open at 800 yards.

At 5X, a fine FFP reticle may become difficult to pick up against hair, brush and shadows.

The SFP reticle remains visually the same thickness it was at higher power.

That can make target acquisition noticeably faster.

Illumination helps FFP tremendously, but I don’t think illumination should automatically be treated as a complete solution. Battery condition, brightness settings and whether you want the illumination running continuously during a hunt are still considerations.

This is one of the legitimate compromises when choosing FFP.

Mirage Is One of the Strongest Arguments for FFP

High magnification isn’t always usable.

Anyone who spends enough time shooting at distance has looked through a scope on a warm day and discovered that turning the magnification higher actually makes the sight picture worse.

Sometimes the right answer is reducing power.

With FFP, you can turn the scope down until you can see through the mirage better and continue using exactly the same wind holds.

With SFP, reducing magnification means your reticle subtensions have changed.

That doesn’t prevent the shot, but it adds another step.

For long range hunting, this is one of the biggest reasons I prefer FFP.

Wind Holds Matter More Than Elevation Holds for Many Hunters

A lot of long range hunters dial elevation but hold wind.

I’m generally far more interested in having a usable wind reticle than having a giant Christmas-tree-style elevation grid covering the bottom half of my sight picture.

Wind can change between the time the rifle is dialed and the time the shot breaks.

Being able to make that correction immediately through the reticle is valuable.

This is also where FFP shines.

If my wind call changes from 4 MOA to 6 MOA, I can make that adjustment immediately no matter what magnification I’ve selected.

Competition Is a Different Application

For positional or timed competition, FFP becomes even easier to justify.

Multiple targets may be at different distances. The shooter may need to change magnification. There may not be time to dial every correction.

Reticle holds and immediate corrections become much more important.

Having subtensions remain accurate at every magnification setting makes the entire process simpler.

That doesn’t mean FFP is only for competition. I prefer it for hunting as well.

But competition demonstrates its advantages particularly clearly.

Traditional Hunting Is Where SFP Still Makes a Lot of Sense

Take the opposite situation.

The hunter may spend most of the day carrying a rifle with the scope at minimum magnification.

Shots are generally made from relatively close distances.

Longer shots allow enough time to range, dial and increase magnification.

Reticle visibility at low power is more important than being able to make an immediate 7.5-MOA reticle hold at an arbitrary magnification.

SFP makes a lot of sense there.

That hunter isn’t giving anything up that matters very much to the way he actually uses the rifle.

First Focal Plane Pros and Cons

Second Focal Plane Pros and Cons

So Which Do I Prefer?

First focal plane.

That has been my preference for years, and my reasoning hasn’t changed much.

I like knowing that the reticle is correct regardless of where the magnification ring happens to be. I like being able to reduce power because of mirage and still make the same wind hold. I like being able to measure corrections without first checking the magnification setting.

But that doesn’t mean I think every FFP scope is better than every SFP scope.

FFP versus SFP is a tradeoff, and I would not allow focal plane alone to dictate which scope I purchased.

A well-designed SFP scope with reliable mechanics is preferable to a poorly designed or unreliable FFP scope.

Great optical performance is nice. A good reticle is important. But the scope first has to maintain zero, track correctly and return where it’s supposed to.

Mechanics are a must.

The Bottom Line