Scope like this one only with a mildot reticle?

session savage

Sorry lads if yer sick of rifle scope questions but as times are tough its harder to find the right scope that money will allow.

Anyway what I'm after is a rifle scope ideally with target turrets, FFP mildot reticle with side parrallax.

I found this scope by browsing the net
http://www.nikonhunting.com/products/riflescopes/m-223/3-12x42SF_BDC_600/8489
Its everything I want except the reticle.

Anyone here able to suggest another scope in the same price range? around 400 yoyo.

dev110

Here are two from the Bushnell range.

2.5-16x 42mm

3–12x 44mm

Not sure on prices though but I doubt they would be that expensive

Norwayviking

session savage wrote: »

Sorry lads if yer sick of rifle scope questions but as times are tough its harder to find the right scope that money will allow.

Anyway what I'm after is a rifle scope ideally with target turrets, FFP mildot reticle with side parrallax.

I found this scope by browsing the net
http://www.nikonhunting.com/products/riflescopes/m-223/3-12x42SF_BDC_600/8489
Its everything I want except the reticle.

Anyone here able to suggest another scope in the same price range? around 400 yoyo.

how about this one:D


http://cgi.ebay.ie/Falcon-Optics-4-14x44-FFP-Series-Scope-Riflescope-First-Focal-Plane-Reticle-/130576528906?pt=UK_SportingGoods_Hunting_ShootingSports_ET&hash=item1e66f7b60a

session savage

Thanks for the replies lads. They all look good. Spoiled for choice.

poulo6.5

session savage wrote: »

Sorry lads if yer sick of rifle scope questions but as times are tough its harder to find the right scope that money will allow.

Anyway what I'm after is a rifle scope ideally with target turrets, FFP mildot reticle with side parrallax.

I found this scope by browsing the net
http://www.nikonhunting.com/products/riflescopes/m-223/3-12x42SF_BDC_600/8489
Its everything I want except the reticle.

Anyone here able to suggest another scope in the same price range? around 400 yoyo.

i had a hawke sidewinder 30 that i bought new for €350 in steaklems of thurles. it has all that you asked for and is great value for money

zeissman

session savage wrote: »

Sorry lads if yer sick of rifle scope questions but as times are tough its harder to find the right scope that money will allow.

Anyway what I'm after is a rifle scope ideally with target turrets, FFP mildot reticle with side parrallax.

I found this scope by browsing the net
http://www.nikonhunting.com/products/riflescopes/m-223/3-12x42SF_BDC_600/8489
Its everything I want except the reticle.

Anyone here able to suggest another scope in the same price range? around 400 yoyo.

I bought a clearidge xp5 4.5-22.5x50 recently from www.theopticzone.com
Mildot ret, target turrets, side parrallax SFP reticle. Its a very good scope and cost 480 euro in total after paying vat etc,
Why do you want a FFP reticle if you dont mind me asking

session savage

zeissman wrote: »

I bought a clearidge xp5 4.5-22.5x50 recently from www.theopticzone.com
Mildot ret, target turrets, side parrallax SFP reticle. Its a very good scope and cost 480 euro in total after paying vat etc,
Why do you want a FFP reticle if you dont mind me asking

I use the mil dots all the time to calculate range and am so used to it that it's really quick. A FFP reticle would let me zoom right in and still get an accurate mil dot reading but a SFP doesn't magnify the reticle so you can only use it at a set mag (usually 10x)

De_Tomaso

All top scopes quality scopes are FFP and there are many reasons for that.

1. You can always use the reticle for distance calculations and bullet drop compensations, disregarding the magnification setting. It always work.

2. FFP reticles do not move with magnification change and SFP reticle do. In some cases more and in top SFP scopes a bit less, but they all move.

3. FFP reticles are better for low light use since they can be seen better in the dark.

The only problem with FFP scopes is that they are not cheap. Still in my opinion they well worth the money.

I would check the following scopes:

http://www.optics-trade.eu/shop/en/vortex-viper-pst-4-16x50-ffp.html

http://www.optics-trade.eu/shop/en/kaps-tactical-2-5-10x50-sniper.html

http://www.optics-trade.eu/shop/en/ior-tactical-3-18x42-il-sf-ffp-mil-mil.html - my personal favorite

zeissman

De_Tomaso wrote: »

All top scopes quality scopes are FFP and there are many reasons for that.

1. You can always use the reticle for distance calculations and bullet drop compensations, disregarding the magnification setting. It always work.

2. FFP reticles do not move with magnification change and SFP reticle do. In some cases more and in top SFP scopes a bit less, but they all move.

3. FFP reticles are better for low light use since they can be seen better in the dark.

The only problem with FFP scopes is that they are not cheap. Still in my opinion they well worth the money.

I would check the following scopes:

http://www.optics-trade.eu/shop/en/vortex-viper-pst-4-16x50-ffp.html

http://www.optics-trade.eu/shop/en/kaps-tactical-2-5-10x50-sniper.html

http://www.optics-trade.eu/shop/en/ior-tactical-3-18x42-il-sf-ffp-mil-mil.html - my personal favorite

You can get a top quality scope with sfp or ffp reticle.
Zeiss, schmidt & bender and swarvoski all make scopes with both types of reticle. I have two zeiss 6x24x56 sfp reticle scopes and the point of impact
stays the same no matter what mag setting.
Most of the high end target scopes have sfp reticles and I dont think the top shooters would be using them if the point of impact changed every time they changed the mag setting.
I have had ffp scopes before but I prefer the sfp type.
I have never had a problem seeing the reticle in low light.

De_Tomaso

There is not a single Premier Reticles with SFP and Shmidt&Bender with SFP are only couple of 5-25 and 12-50. Majority of top shooters use FFP for the reasons I stated before. Even Zeiss for professionals is producing Hensold scopes in FFP and also Kahles started to produce tactical scopes with FFP, since there K models (SFP) in the past were not so successful as they could be. Now they are introducing 624i with FFP to change this.

It is true that top quality hunting scopes from Swarovski and Leica are SFP, since with illumination most of the hunters don't need FFP any more to see the reticle in the dark.

In the tactical world FFP is still the rule and it does not look like this will change soon. They are without the doubt more useful.

At the end I could say that the decision about SFP or FFP in top quality hunting optics is a matter of taste, since most of the hunters does not use reticle for bullet drop compensation or distance calculations.

willcork

Hi all,
I recently bought a Falcon 5.5-25 x 50. It's a fantastic scope with the following, First focal plane reticle, target/tactical turrets, side parallax/focus adjustment.
It's mil/mil so the adjustments are in 0.1 mil increments to match the mil reticle.
It comes with two reticle options ML16 or EMD which is mil dot with half mil hash marks.
I love it and you'll be out of it for well under €400

Norwayviking

session savage wrote: »

I use the mil dots all the time to calculate range and am so used to it that it's really quick. A FFP reticle would let me zoom right in and still get an accurate mil dot reading but a SFP doesn't magnify the reticle so you can only use it at a set mag (usually 10x)

I prefer mildot reticles as well,but it SFP.
Its no problem using it at 10x or 24x as i have on my sightronscope for ranging,the only problem with SFP is that sometimes the 10x or 24x settiing isnt always 100%,so its an idea to use it at a known distance and at a known size object,to get the mildot accurate,and then put a mark on the turret at this magnification.
But i have only experienced it with cheaper scopes in SFP,the last Millet scope i had in 4-16x50,the mildot was actually not 100% at 10x,closer to 11 before i could get accurate enough distance.:rolleyes:
This you will avoid with FFP,but its all a matter of habit i guess.:D
And the mildot reticle together with the mildot master is great tool for ranging in the field.